Weinberg et al. 2016. LIP Tomb in the Chincha Valley

7/26/2019 Weinberg et al. 2016. LIP Tomb in the Chincha Valley

1/24

Andean Past

' 12 A35+%' 8

2016

Demographic Analysis of a Looted lateIntermediate Period Tomb, Chincha Valley, Peru

Camille Weinberge University of Texas at Austin, %&4'+$'3@5'9#4.'&

Benjamin T. [email protected], $'+3#@#+.%

Maria Cecilia LozadaUniversity of Chicago, %#@%*+%#.'&

Charles S. StanishCotsen Institute of Archaeology, 45#+4*@#5*3.%#.'&

Henry TantaleanCotsen Institute of Archaeology, *'35#5#'#@#*.'4

See next page for additional authors

F 5*+4 #& #&&+5+# 3-4 #5: *=://&++5#%4.+$3#3.#+'.'&/#&'##45

P#35 5*'A3%*#'+%# A5*3 C4, #& 5*' B++%# #& P*4+%#A5*3 C4


2/24

Demographic Analysis of a Looted late Intermediate Period Tomb,Chincha Valley, Peru

Authors

C#+' !'+$'3, B'#+ T. N+3#, M#3+# C'%++# L#, C*#3'4 S. S5#+4*, H'3 T#5#'#, J#%$B'34, #& T'33# J'4


3/24

DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS OF A LOOTED LATE INTERMEDIATE PERIOD TOMB,CHINCHA VALLEY,PERU

CAMILLE WEINBERG(University of California, Los Angeles)

BENJAMIN T.NIGRA(Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles)

MARIA CECILIA LOZADA(The University of Chicago)

CHARLES STANISH(Cotsen Institute of Archaeology & Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles)

HENRY TANTALEN(Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles)

JACOBBONGERS(Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles)

TERRAHJONES(Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles)

INTRODUCTION

The Programa Arqueolgico Chincha(PACH) explores the development of precolum-bian settlement and society on Perus SouthCoast. Chincha is one of the largest and mostproductive coastal drainages in western SouthAmerica, and in antiquity was the seat of densehuman occupation from the Paracas Formativethrough the Spanish conquest (Canziani 1992;Engel 2010; Lumbreras 2001; Wallace 1971). In

2013 we began a program of full-coverage surveyin the narrow valley neck, starting just belowthe point where the Ro San Juan bifurcates intothe Ros Chico and Matagente, and terminatingsome twenty-five kilometers upstream. Thischaupiyungabiome is an ecological, and in many

senses, a cultural transition area between the

coast and the Andean highlands. During thecourse of field-work we encountered a surprisingnumber of Late Intermediate Period (LIP)cemeteries associated with the Seoro deChincha or Kingdom of Chincha (C.E. 1200-1475), defined based on a comparison ofassociated artifacts with published analyses ofChincha ceramic styles and other forms ofmaterial culture (Kroeber and Strong 1924;Menzel 1966, 1976; Menzel and Rowe 1966). In

total, across approximately seventy-five squarekilometers, we recorded over forty cemeteriescontaining over five hundred severely lootedtombs (Figure 1) (Bongers 2014). Althoughothers mention above-ground sepulchers in theupper valley (Lumbreras 2001:70; Wallace

ANDEAN PAST 12 (2016):133-154.


4/24

ANDEAN PAST 12(2016) - 134

1971:80, 1991:258), we were surprised by theirabundance and density, as well as the amountand condition of human remains scattered onthe surface outside these collective tombs.

From an architectural perspective, middle

valley Chincha tombs appear strikingly similarto contemporaneous highland chullpasstoneburial towers with multiple individualscontaining members of shared ethnic/lineageidentity groups. In the highlands, theappearance of these towers coincides with theLIP, a period of widespread politicalfragmentation (Arkush 2008:345). In thisregional context, chullpasare understood to belandscape markers which signal territoriality and

social boundaries as independent corporategroups contend with one another for localsovereignty (Stanish 2012). The appearance ofchullpa-like structures less than twentykilometers upland from the Chincha politicalcenter at Huaca Centinela near the ocean ispuzzling. Both ethnohistorical andarchaeological evidence suggest that theChincha political landscape was highlycentralized and united under a carefullymanaged regional economya great contrast to

that of the LIP highlands (Castro and OrtegaMorejon 1934 [1558]; Lumbreras 2001;Rostworowski 1970; Sandweiss 1992). Whilethe burial towers themselves appear similar, thedemographic profile of the individuals occupyingChincha chullpashas never been examined. Thisreport provides the results from basicdemographic tests conducted on thissampleMinimum Number of Individuals(MNI), age profiles, and skeletal sex.

The results of our analysis suggest that LIPpeoples in the Chincha middle valley practicedcommunal interment in above-ground tombs formales and females of all ages. Age profilessuggest a higher mortality rate for subadultindividuals. All in all, we suggest that thesesepulchers may have served as meaningful,

accessible mortuary spaces for distinct socialunits over extended periods of time. Chullpabuilding is exclusive to middle valley contexts,as lower valley burial practices dating to the LIPcome in a variety of subterranean, distinct forms(Uhle 1924 [1901]). This is perhaps to be

expected near the politys urban core in thelower valley, where we would predict a highdegree of interaction between fishing, farming,and mercantile groups, as well as strong foreigninfluences from distant trading partners. Chin-cha tombs in the middle valley thus parallel thedemographic and architectural patterns ofhighland chullpas, suggesting a similar functionas markers of corporate territorialitya workinghypothesis based on spatial analysis of tomb

clustering (Bongers 2014). Yet, in Chincha,interred individuals are linked exclusively withLIP material culture displaying typical motifsshared throughout the Seoros sphere ofinfluence. This implies regular interaction withlower valley populations, or at the very least,reason for heavy imitation, and the density ofburials in the narrow middle valley necksuggests a remarkably high population (ibid.).On one hand, the appearance of lineage-basedmortuary signaling practices so close to the

politically centralized coast calls for areevaluation of Chincha territoriality. On theother, we must consider whether therelationship between political organization andlate pre-Hispanic mortuary monumentality isless straightforward than previously anticipated.

The unexpected abundance of material inthis single tomb required us to focus on this onecontext. The significance of the data recoveredin the tomb (only one of hundreds in thevalley), coupled with the success of thisinvestigation of demographic data, underlinesthe potential for future osteological analyses ingreater depth in this region. Additional work onthis and similar looted contexts will addresscranial modification patterns, measures ofbiological distance, ancient DNA (aDNA),


5/24

135 - Weinberg et al.: LIP tomb in the Chincha Valley

paleopathology, and other osteological analysesthat will allow us to profile the population thatoccupied the Chincha Valley prior to and afterthe arrival of the Incas.

MORTUARY MONUMENTALITY ASSIGNALING

The above-ground mortuary tradition ofmiddle valley Chincha during LIP times sharesstrong similarities with the practice of chullpabuilding in the contemporary southernhighlands in and around the Lake TiticacaBasin. While highland chullpas demonstratearchitectural variation (rectilinear vs. circularplans; heights ranging from one to five meters;materials including cut stone, field stone, and

adobe), they are generally defined as above-ground or semi-subterranean burial towerscontaining multiple individuals. Severalchroniclers attest to the use of these structuresas sepulchers, particularly for high statusindividuals (Cobo 1976 [1653]; Guamn Pomade Ayala 2011 [c. 1615]:163-168). Anillustration by Guamn Poma de Ayala (ibid.:166) depicts the interment of multipleCollasuyu dead in stone towers, accompanied bythe offering of libations, and the introduction of

the recently deceased. His image of a Chinchay-suyu burial procession depicts the deceasedapproaching an above-ground stone structurealready containing human remains.

Archaeological evidence indicates that asmany as two hundred individuals were interredin single, large chullpas (Nordenskild 1953;Rydn 1947:343-361), and aDNA analysis ofselect chullpasat the site of Tompullo 2 (Are-quipa Region) demonstrates genetic relatednessof tomb occupants (Baca et al. 2012). Accessinto these sepulchers allowed for continuousphysical interaction with the deceased, whetherby the deposition of offerings, removal of thedead for important events, or the addition ofnew individuals (Isbell 1997).

While ancestor veneration and mortuaryritual appear as the most proximate acts, thestrategic visibility of the structures themselvesbegs questions of territoriality and socialexclusivity. The geographical placement ofchullpaswas conscious and patterned (Hyslop

1979), an observation supported by GIS-basedanalysis of chullpa clustering and landscapeplacement in the western Lake Titicaca basin(Bongers et al. 2012). Explanations for chullpaspatial patterning favor geopolitical models.Following the collapse of the Middle HorizonWari and Tiwanaku states, the LIP is broadlyunderstood as a time of political balkanizationand territorial fragmentation (Arkush 2011).The increased use of chullpas as markers of

political claims during this time fits this scenarioneatly. Hyslop (1979:152) cites an unpublisheddocument from the Archivo General de Indiasdescribing the use of chullpas as territorialboundary markers by Lupaca lords. Kesseli andPrssinen (2005) emphasize these burial towersas symbols of ethnic identity that reinforce thebounded territories of particular ethnic groups.While it is clear that chullpa constructionreaches its apogee in the LIP, the tradition tookroot in the Late Formative Period. Stanish

(2012) suggests that above-ground burialtraditions appeared in the Titicaca Basin asearly as the third century C.E., and becamerestricted to political and ritual elite during theheight of Tiwanaku expansion.

Following the collapse of the Tiwanakustate, corporate or lineage-based groups seizedupon the former elite burial traditions as ameans of jockeying for status in thedecentralized LIP political landscape (Goldstein2005). The explosion of chullpa constructionduring the first half of the second millenniumC.E. is strongly linked to new politicalcircumstances and shifting regional stability.

Chullpas also reinforce social asymmetrieswithin groups that share common ethnic or


6/24

ANDEAN PAST 12(2016) - 136

political identities. This extends to classdistinctions within societies under the control offoreign powers, as demonstrated by Tantalen(2006) for Inca and Lupaca chullpasat the siteof Cutimbo. Rather than focusing on thereproduction of the ayllu as a whole, the

distribution of burial wealth and placement ofbodies in Cutimbo cemeteries suggests thatLupaca elites were concerned with reproducingsocial distinctions that separated them fromLupaca commoners, even as typically Incamaterials and practices were being introducedand adopted by Lupaca elites. In this case,chullpas strongly designate social boundarieswithin shared geopolitical or ethnic distinctions.In this regard it is clear, as Nielsen (2008)

emphasizes, that chullpas simultaneously playmultiple roles: burial places for the dead,gathering places for ancestor veneration,markers of corporate ayllu organization, and asreference points for converting social memoryinto daily practice. The combination of multiplefunctions into a comprehensible materialityenables chullpas to effectively translate pastaction into present doxa.

Human actors are locked into a recursive

relationship with the built environments thatthey design, construct and use, includingarchitecture (Rapoport 2006). Key tounderstanding LIP chullpa-building is the factthat architecture readily transmits signals thatprescribe human action and participation(Blanton 1994; Moore 1996). Chullpasserve asindicators of political territoriality, promote rankand class distinctions, and provide referencepoints for the negotiation of individual andgroup identity, among other functions. Byphysically mapping present and past socialrelations on the landscape, they distribute theinformation necessary for group building andeffective cooperation. In the sense that thecontinuous revisitation and maintenance ofchullpassurpasses the pragmatic costs of otherforms of interment, and given that a group tomb

and the repeated ritual depositions associatedwith it would be expensive to fake, mortuarymonumentality serves as a form of costlysignaling (Gintis et al. 2001). As understood inthe southern highlands, ayllu groupsdemonstrate to potential cooperators or

competitors that they possess the resources tomark and defend a territory. The chullpais theapparatus by which the signal is sent, but thesignals desired effect can vary. Signal contentmay shift from region to region, may depend onthe particular social relationships that areemphasized, and may be more or less effective,depending on the familiarity of the recipient.

The regional context of middle valley Chin-

cha chullpas, however, differs greatly from thatof their highland counterparts. The Chinchamiddle valley, within twenty kilometers of thedense and politically unified Seoroof Chincha,appears in sharp contrast with the regionaldestabilization occurring at the same time in thesouthern highlands. While the structuresthemselves are architecturally analogous, thenature of their content (the occupants) remainsunexplored in LIP coastal contexts. In order tocompare the contents of Chincha chullpas to

their highland counterparts, this study describesa basic battery of osteological tests aimed atuncovering aspects of the deceaseds socialidentities. We may consider the possibility that,in Chincha, the middle valley remained morepolitically contested than extant ethnohistoricaland archaeological data suggests. This would besupported by tomb demographics indicatinginterment of whole lineage/corporate groups.Alternatively, interment of only a few high-status individuals in Chincha chullpas wouldemphasize the prevalence of rank distinctions inthe middle valley, perhaps related to the abilityof those individuals to benefit from itineranttraders transporting goods between the coastand highlands.


7/24


THE CHINCHAS

The Chinchas, the Late Intermediate Periodregional seorofrom which the valley takes itsname (C.E. 1200-1470), are a fascinating case inpre-Columbian Andean socioeconomic organi-

zation. This politically centralized andeconomically differentiated late coastal polityoperated a large maritime trading networkconnecting southern Peru to what is nowEcuador, exchanging southern metals forvaluable sumptuary goodsvaluable Spondylusprinceps shell, emeralds, and gold ornaments,among other commodities (Rostworowski1970:144-6).

Ethnohistorical sources suggest that theChinchas retained a significant degree ofautonomy following the arrival of Incaimperialism (Castro and Ortega Morejn 1934[1558]:135,140-1; Cieza de Len 1959 [1553]:346; Pizarro 1921 [1571]:180-183,443), a factorperhaps related to the established productivepotential and maritime capital enjoyed by thekingdom. Corroborating archaeological explora-tions demonstrate significant continuity inChincha economic and settlement structure

(Morris 2004; Sandweiss 1992) despite an influxof new, foreign stylistic tropes from elsewhere inthe Inca sphere of influence (Kroeber andStrong 1924; Menzel and Rowe 1966). Thebloodless capitulation of such a large and wellorganized polity was an uncommon event inInca geopolitics, demonstrating the empiresflexible and locally-directed imperial strategies(Morris 1988, 1998; Morris and Covey 2006;Morris and Santillana 2007).

High population estimates from ethno-historical sources are used to emphasize thevalleys productive potential and the efficient,centralized arrangement of economic tasks. Akey component of the Chincha case is therelationship between economic specialization,community identity, and demography. An

anonymous document written in the 1570s,titledAviso de el modo que havia en el gobierno delos indios en tiempo del Inca y como se repartian lastierras y tributos (theAviso for short), provideskey information on the organization ofproduction and trading practices in Chincha

under Inca rule, suggesting that fisher people,farmers, and craft specialists occupied distinctsettlement clusters in the lower valley (Crespo1978; Rostworowski 1970:157). Settlementpattern studies and focused excavations supportthis claim (Alcalde et al. 2002; Lumbreras2001:57-8; Menzel and Rowe 1966; Sandweiss1992). As a Chincha-specific and widely citedsource, the Aviso places the Inca periodpopulation of the valley at 30,000 individuals

divided into segments of 12,000 farmers, 10,000fishermen, and 6,000 merchants (Rostworowski1970:137). Other chroniclers deemed thisinformation significant enough to venture theirown population estimates, though it is clear thatthere was much cross-pollination of material.Cieza de Len provides a total number similar tothat of the Aviso25,000 persons (1959[1553]:346). Both the Aviso and Cieza areclosely echoed by Reginaldo de Lizrraga, aSpanish cleric writing in the late sixteenth

century, who subdivided this number into10,000 farmers, fishermen, and merchanttributaries each. However, he assumed that thehousehold was the basic unit of tribute, insteadof the individual, and estimated the real valleypopulation at around 100,000 (each householdcontaining an average of three persons)(Lizrraga 1968 [c. 1600/1909]:44), an approachto Andean household economy supported byarchaeological data elsewhere in southern Peru(Stanish 1992). Archaeologist Luis Lumbreras(2001:34) suggests a number of 84,000 personsby applying similar arithmetic to the exactnumbers provided by the Aviso, producingcommunity totals of 30,000 (fishing), 36,000(farming), and 18,000 (merchant/artisan).These numbers are substantial, and speak to theresource-richness of the region and the


8/24

ANDEAN PAST 12(2016) - 138

management capacity of the Chincha as apolitical entity. However, considering thatLizrragas account appears linked to the samesource material as that in the Aviso (Rostwo-rowski 1970:36-7), we are left with significantlydisparate population estimates stemming from

the same root information, based on whetherindividuals or households are talliedanywherefrom 30,000 to 100,000 persons.

One means of establishing an empirical basisfor the Chincha population involves analysis ofcemetery populations, juxtaposition withsettlement data, and statistically supportedextrapolation across the time period in question.Bongers (2014) investigated the chullpas

recorded from the 2013 survey. He found thatthese tombs (all visibly open and disturbed)cluster throughout the survey zone and sharesimilarities in form, construction techniques,size, material contents, and placement on thelandscape, suggesting a shared mortuarytradition (ibid.). Generally speaking, cemeteriesare associated with specific, contemporaneousdomestic areas, with some settlementsassociated with multiple cemeteries. Our surveynoted a visible similarity in the amount of

human remains contained in each tomb. Nearlyall recorded Chincha mortuary contexts in theupper valley are collective tombs.

CEMETERY UC-012(PV57-137)

Our team recorded cemetery UC-012 duringa survey of the Chincha middle and upper valleyin 2013 (Figures 1 and 2). The site was notrecorded by Wallace (1971) during his initialsurvey of the valley, but INDEA surveyorsprovided it with the designation PV57-137. Toour knowledge, the only mention of the site inthe archaeological literature is Jos Canzianissettlement maps of the valley (1992:88, 2009:159, 292, 411), an aerial photograph (Canziani1992:96), and a paragraph describing the site asa true necropolis . . . where chullpas are

arranged on a natural platform in aligned setsforming a web of passages, and where weobserved the existence of a perimeter wall thatmust have restricted access to the mausoleums(Canziani 2009:422). Canziani considers the siteas part of a broader upper valley Chincha

mortuary tradition consisting of rectilinear,above-ground tombs that played key roles asdwellings for the dead and as stages for ancestorveneration. Unworked wooden beamssupporting mud-covered reed frames served asroofs over mud-plastered walls of irregular fieldstones set in mud mortar (ibid.: 420-421). Low,narrow doorways on the north or west side oftombs provided access for the living.

Canziani recorded an average measurementof four to five meters per side for these collectivetombs, although he notes that some largerspecimens may indicate socioeconomicdisparities between the families or clanscontained in each tomb (Canziani 2009:421).He notes that these sepulchers have long beenthe object of intensive and persistent looting, anunfortunate consequence of the Spanish desirefor precious metals (Cieza de Leon 1959 [1553]:347; Lumbreras 2001:27-28; Menzel and Rowe

1966:68; Rostworowski 1970:171; Sandweiss1992:6; Uhle 1924 [1901]:87-88; Wallace 1991:258).

Beyond Canzianis brief architecturalanalysis, the only published study of a LIPmortuary context in Chincha comes from theearly collections of Max Uhle in six Chinchacemeteries (1924 [1901]) and subsequentreevaluation of his excavated materials (Kroeberand Strong 1924; Menzel 1966). Uhle describedfour types of tombs dating from the late LIPthrough early Spanish contact, but dedicatedlittle time to the spatial layout of cemeteries ortheir occupants. He does note that graves of hissecond type appeared to be family intermentscontaining up to thirty crania (Uhle 1924[1901]:89-90), but his architectural descriptions


9/24


do not match those given for upper valleysepulchers containing similar grave goods.

Our survey data corroborate Canzianisarchitectural description of Chincha tombs atUC-012. We recorded a total of forty-eight

distinct tomb units. These structures appear toonce have been above ground or semi-subterranean, but aeolian fill and lootersbackdirt covers most tombs to near the tops oftheir walls. Walls consist of irregular field stonesset in mud mortar on the interior, averagingapproximately forty centimeters thick. Someisolated and poorly preserved tapia elements arevisible near the tops of surviving walls. We addthat doorways are rectangular-to-trapezoidal in

shape with stone lintels, and in some cases tombsappear to be connected to secondary chambersthrough these doorways. We observed that themajority of doorways share an orientation of 346degrees west of north. Tombs are tightlyclustered, forming blocks or rows, and in somecases multiple chambers share a common wall.

The cemetery is associated with a variety ofLIP Chincha material in addition to humanremains, including quantities of maize, textile

nets and garment fragments, a small wooden oar,decorated and undecorated ceramics, marineshell used as a container for red cinnabarpigment, and a multitude of gourd bowls. Allsepulchers are badly looted, with removedhuman remains and artifacts scattered onto thesurrounding surface. We chose UC-012 as atarget cemetery because it demonstrates averagegeneral characteristics of the universe ofChincha cemeteries recorded and because it sitsclose enough to modern population centers to bethreatened by additional looting.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We selected a single looted tomb from thesouthern edge of cemetery UC-012 (UC-012 T-043) that by observation contained material

consistent with other tombs at the site. Thistomb was situated amongst others at the centerof the site, but was separated from its nearestneighbor by approximately four meters. Thisarrangement increased the likelihood that thetarget was the source of all surface material in

our collection unit. This tomb measuresapproximately five square meters (2.1 by 2.4meters) and matches the orientation andconstruction techniques outlined above,including a doorway with a stone lintel on itsnorthern side (Figure 3). Looters dug a lowercavity in the northeast corner of the structure,resulting in an uneven surface within the tomb;we could not observe any type of floor, and weassume that this is obscured by the significant

deposition of aeolian and looted fill. Tomb depthranged from approximately 1.25 meters to 1.75meters.

The contents of this unit were thoroughlydisturbed but abundant, as is the case in themajority of UC-012 burials. It is clear thathuman remains were violently displaced andmixed together on at least one occasion,resulting in a tangled and disarranged pile ofskeletal elements (Figure 4). Apart from some

elements still held together by soft tissue, therewas no association of elements that could bereasonably used to reconstruct the originalplacements, orientations, or relationships amongtomb occupants. We placed a four by four metercollection unit around the structure to accountfor material within the tomb and one meterbeyond in each cardinal direction. We carefullycollected all loose surface material, but did notexcavate or free elements that remained partiallyburied; thus, our total sample slightly under-represents the total content of the tomb. Theassemblage was moved to a secure laboratory inChincha Alta for analysis. Non-osteologicalmaterials recorded include a cactus-spine comb,gourd bowls, white undecorated textiles used asmortuary wrappings, undecorated ceramics, andmaize cobs.


10/24

ANDEAN PAST 12(2016) - 140

We carried out a basic osteological analysisto determine a general demographic profile forUC-012 T-043, considering the age, sex, andminimum number of individuals represented byour sample. The recovered collection comprisedbones representative of nearly all elements of the

human skeleton, suggesting that our sample,though from a disturbed and commingledcontext, was suitable for the proposed analyses.Our methodology followed the standardprocedures developed by Buikstra and Ubelakerfor Coding Commingled or IncompleteRemains (1994:9).

MINIMUM NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS (MNI)

Following procedures and reference pointsoutlined in Buikstra and Ubelaker (1994) foridentifying and siding skeletal elements, weestablished an MNI value for each elementpresent in the salvage collection. Due to ease ofcalculation and analytical precedent, MNIremains a widely used analytical technique bybioarchaeologists, osteologists, and physicalanthropologists.

Alternative metrics do exist which better

avoid under-counting, such as MLNI (MostLikely Number of Individuals), but these rely onpair-matching of right and left elements fromsingle individuals (Adams and Konigsberg 2008:140). The size of our sample and the extent ofdisarticulation in the field made MNI the mostanalytically appropriate technique.

A relatively high degree of organicpreservation and a very low incidence offragmentation aided in the identification andsiding of specimens. Low fragmentation alsomitigates the risk of double counting. Table 1shows the large variation in MNI values acrossall elements, reinforcing the logical propositionthat small bones, which are easily lost, are poorerindicators of MNI compared to robust longbones and cranial elements. However, we do

wish to note that overall, the reasonablycomplete distribution of elements in ourcollection unit suggests that the tomb was alocus of interment for relatively completeindividuals, rather than an ossuary for disparatehuman remains. Additionally, the lack of any

apparent selectivity toward particular elementsprovides evidence that the tomb was a site ofprimary rather than secondary burial.

Right femora provided the highest MNIestimate of all elements in our sample, and thusthe MNI of the collection unit population, with63 individuals represented (Table 1). High MNIfor other robust elements suggess that this is notan anomaly; for example, we recorded 54

mandibles, 54 right humeri, 51 left tibiae, 46 leftulnae, and 51 complete right temporal bones.Less robust elements produced lower, butcomparatively significant values. For instance,we recorded an MNI of 41 based on left ribs(total number of left ribs divided by 12) and anMNI of 36 based on thoracic vertebrae (totalnumber of thoracic vertebrae divided by 12).Smaller elements were under-represented in oursample, likely due to loss and deterioration; wenoted MNI counts of 5 based on left patellae, 2

based on hyoids, and counts below 10 for allcarpals and metacarpals. The only elements notrepresented in the sample are right lessermultangular and left navicular carpals.


11/24


Table 1. MNI estimates, by element, for thecomplete collection showing number of recordedspecimens per side, when applicable.

AGEESTIMATION

We constructed an age profile for the tombsample based primarily on maxillary andmandibular dentition, using age categoriesdesignated by Buikstra and Ubelaker (1994:9).

We used epiphyseal fusion of long bones, oscoxae, and scapulae as a supporting approach.While age estimates from multiple bones withina complete skeleton can corroborate an ageestimate for an individual, the comminglednature of this collection required that each boneprovide an independent age-at-death estimate.Therefore, we applied the most restrictive agecategories possible to each post-cranial element.Age categories necessarily vary depending on

each elements individual developmentalmorphology.

Mandibular and maxillary dentition providedthe most restrictive probable age estimates forour sample. We recorded erupted dentition andpresent but non-erupted teeth for 57 disarticu-lated mandibles and 29 paired sets of maxillaeassociated with crania. All specimens werecomplete except for 12 mandibles and 3 maxillaethat were 50 percent complete. To avoid double

counting, we insured that incomplete specimenscould not be paired to form complete elements.Probable age ranges were assigned according tothe formation and eruption sequence in teeth ofNative Americans (ibid. 1994:51). Specimenswith complete permanent dentition wereestimated as adults over 18 years of age, whileimmature specimens that had not reached thiseruption stage provided more specific probableage ranges within the categories of infant (0-2years), child (2-11 years), and adolescent (12-18years) provided by Buikstra and Ubelakerspecifically for classifying commingled remains(1994:9).

Table 2 depicts the quantities of specimenscomprising these life stages. Of twenty-ninecomplete maxillae, we identified 10 percent as


12/24

ANDEAN PAST 12(2016) - 142

infants, 62 percent as children, 10 percent asadolescents, and 17 percent as adults. Of fifty-seven mandibles, we identified 33 percent asinfants, 32 percent as children, 9 percent asadolescents, and 26 percent as adults. For bothmaxillae and mandibles, the distribution of these

frequencies across the four life stages wassignificantly different from the expected value of25 percent in each stage (Maxillae: Chisquared=21.62, df=3, p18 years) categories as usedbefore (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994:51). Thismethod of categorization did not alter theoverall percentages of juveniles (includinginfant, early child, late child, and adolescent)

and adults for both maxillae and mandibles.However, for mandibles, 30 percent representedinfancy, 26 percent early childhood, 9 percentlate childhood, 9 percent adolescence, and 26percent adulthood. For maxillae, 10 percentrepresented infancy, 24 percent early childhood,38 percent late childhood, 10 percentadolescence and 17 percent adulthood. Thisclassification scheme de-emphasizes the exactchronological ages that bound these categories;the authors propose that using biologicallyrelevant categories better describes a givenpopulation in terms of life history (Roksandicand Armstrong 2011:340). Both categorizationsapplied to this collection emphasize theabundance of juvenile remains present in thistomb.


13/24


The long bones within the tomb samplerepresented a range of life stages, and juvenileremains consistently outnumbered adult remainsfor these elements. A total of 553 long boneswere sorted by element and analyzed by stage ofdistal and proximal epiphyseal fusion to generate

age-at-death estimates, as described by Buikstraand Ubelaker (1994:43). All analyzed long boneswere complete, except for 66 bones that lackeda single epiphysis (25 percent to 75 percentcomplete). Eight long bones were excluded fromthe age analysis because post-mortem erosionprevented epiphyseal analysis. We extendedfusion onset ages two years younger to accountfor the different male and female developmentalranges (ibid.: 42).

More precise age categories could be appliedto incompletely fused bones, though there werefew of these in the sample. Fusiondevelopmental stages designated most longbones as either less than 12 years or greater than19 years (Table 4). These limits shifted by 2 and3 years for radii (adults >17 years) and humeri(juveniles 22 years). Forconsistency and in accordance with standards forcommingled remains, we termed these stages

juvenile and adult. It should be noted,however, that due to the complexity ofreconciling multiple age categories, thesecategory names as applied to femora, fibulae,tibiae, radii, and humeri do not correspondexactly to the age ranges for the same categorynames applied to dentition.

Figure 5 displays the extent of age categoriesrequired to describe the entire osteologicalcollection from Tomb 043 using the mostrestrictive age categories, as well as thedifficulties in creating consistent age categoriesfor cross-comparison.

For the specimens that comprised thecategories of juvenile and adult defined above,femora were 63 percent juvenile and 37 percent

adult. Fibulae were 57 percent juvenile and 43percent adult, and tibiae were 59 percentjuvenile and 41 percent adult. Radii were 56percent juvenile and 44 percent adult. Humeriwere 67 percent juvenile and 33 percent adult.The constituent age categories specific to each

long bone are shown in Table 4.

Table 4. Long bone age categories and specimencounts based on Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994:43.

We applied fusion onset ranges provided byBuikstra and Ubelaker to os coxae, scapulae, andvertebrae to provide supporting age data for thesample. These elements required additional agecategories specific to fusion onset ages (Table 5).Os coxae samples included full mature pelvicgirdles and unfused ilia, ischia, and pubes.Between ages 14 and 22, the ischium and pubisfuse and later join with the ilium (ibid.: 40-41).Our sample had 17 left and 16 right mature oscoxae representing adults of at least age 22 years.Fifty-eight ilia, 22 pubes, and 30 ischia wereunfused and therefore belonged to juveniles lessthan 14 years of age. We assigned an age range of


14/24

ANDEAN PAST 12(2016) - 144

14-22 years to one ischium and one pubis thatshowed partial fusion. Of all ilia, 63 percent werejuvenile, 36 percent adult, and 1 percentadolescent (14-22 years).

Table 5. Age ranges (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994:43) and defined age categories for analyzed os coxae,

scapulae, and vertebrae.Of 79 collected scapulae, we evaluated 78

complete specimens relative to the age of 12years, when acromion fusion begins. For 36 leftand 42 right specimens, 59 percent wereincompletely fused and thus younger than 12years, and 41 percent were fused and older than12. These values are consistent with the generaltrend of a higher proportion of juvenilespecimens exhibited by crania, dentition, long

bones, and os coxae in the collection; howeverthe need for element-specific age categoriesshould not be disregarded when examining thisresult in greater detail. For 704 lumbar, thoracic,and cervical vertebrae, we recorded incomplete,partial, or complete fusion between the neuralarches and then the centrum. Fusion beginsbetween ages 3 and 6 (ibid.: 43). Thirty percentwere unfused (0-3 years), 12 percent partiallyfused (2-6 years), and 58 percent completelyfused (greater than 3 years). Early vertebralfusion onset suggests that at least 42 percent ofvertebrae are associated with children under age6.

SKELETAL SEX

Sex was assessed for adult crania and oscoxae using sexually dimorphic features outlinedby Buikstra and Ubelaker (1994) and Bass(2005). Skeletal sex determination is a

qualitative evaluation of multiple morphologicalfeatures that substantiate an overall specimen sexestimate. Sex estimates are indiscreet, as featuresare evaluated on a morphology scale ranging frommasculine to feminine. Within the sameindividual, different elements may present asmore masculine or more feminine. As this samplecomprised only disarticulated crania and oscoxae, estimates were restricted to eachspecimen. However, multiple morphological

features within each element were evaluated tobest support each estimate of skeletal sex.

Os coxae provide the most useful markers forestimating morphological or skeletal sex. Weused subpubic region morphologies and greatersciatic notch shape to analyze all 31 completeand 3 nearly complete adult os coxae. Femalesexpress a broadening of the greater sciatic notch,as well as signature subpubic region morphologiesin the ventral arc, subpubic concavity, and an

ischiopubic ramus ridge (Buikstra and Ubelaker1994:17-18). For the sample, os coxae wereevaluated to be 47% male (n=16) and 53%female (n=18) specimens.

The reliability of crania-based sex estimates ispopulation dependent, as cranial morphologydiffers between populations. Therefore, theassumption that male crania exhibit greaterrobusticity should be treated as a mere guidelinefor evaluating cranial dimorphic features. Weconsidered multiple aspects of skull morphologyincluding nuchal crest definition, mastoid processsize, glabella prominence, and mental eminenceto determine probable sex. All of these featuresexpress as larger and more robust in males. Oursex estimates for eight analyzed skulls suggest a1:1 sex ratio (male: n=4, female: n=4), a ratio


15/24


similar to the os coxae sample. One additionaladult crania was incomplete and therefore couldnot be sexed. Despite the inherent subjectivity ofbiological sex determination from cranialfeatures, the consistency between independentcrania and os coxae data confirm our findings.

DISCUSSION

In a similar analysis of looted cave-likemachay tombs in Ancash, Peru, Gerdau-Radonicand Herrera (2010) suggest that disturbed con-texts may provide data useful for characterizingancient mortuary populations and looting prac-tices. In a similar vein, Lozada, Cardona, andBarnard propose that considering looting events

as parts of the archaeological analysis of mortuarycontexts expands social interpretations about theinteraction between living and dead at burial sites(2013:115). Our study of Late IntermediatePeriod mortuary populations in Chincha, the firstto systematically characterize Chincha burialcontexts in the upper valley, supports the valueof such approaches on the South Coast. The datareported here indicates that Tomb 043 of ceme-tery UC-012 contained adults and children, bothmale and female, with a minimum number of 63

estimated individuals. Our MNI estimate for thecollection should be considered a true minimumfor quantifying the interred individuals, becausethe analysis is dependent on recovery factors.This collection represented only a surface recov-ery within Tomb 043, and we know that partiallyburied and uncollectable specimens remained.This was most likely not a secondary ossuary, aswe recovered a representative collection of nearlyall skeletal elements. Additionally, the architec-ture and visibility of these tombs, which compriseentire cemeteries, imply that mortuary practiceswere public and involved established ritual andcuration practices (Bongers 2014).

The age demographic represented by thiscollection potentially represents high juvenilemortality. For mandibles and maxillae, the collec-

tion contained more juvenile than adult speci-mens. For femora, humerii, radii, and tibiae,juvenile bones consistently outnumbered those ofadults by a ratio of approximately 3:2. Additionalsupport for this theory comes from the highproportions of juvenile scapulae, os coxae, and

vertebrae within the collection. A potentialexplanation for the greater abundance of juvenileremains is that there were simply more juvenilesthan adults in the overall burial population,whether due to the demographics of the livingpopulation or to preferential mortuary treatmentfor juveniles. However, the difference in abun-dance poses the possibility that juvenile mortalityrates were greater than those of adults.

Drusini etal. (2001:166) calculated that two offive children died before the age of five years forWari and Nasca populations in the Nazca Valleyfollowing a zero-growth population model; thismortality rate decreased to approximately one infour children after applying a 2.5 percent annualpopulation increase. Under both models, reach-ing age 5 was a critical life stage because probabil-ity of death decreased between ages 5 and 20.Another study of Middle Horizon (C.E. 500-1000) cemeteries in the Moquegua Valley noted

the same sharp decrease in mortality after age 5;children and infants under 5 years of age at deathcomprised approximately 50 percent of the au-thors skeletal collections at each of three differ-ent sites (Baitzel 2008:46). Drusini et al. (2001:166) report that their population pyramids forthese cultures mirrored those of other pre-indus-trialized populations with high fertility and deathrates. Further research in the Chincha Valleycould investigate potential paleodemographicsimilarities between these precolumbian popula-tions.

While we suspect that high juvenile mortalityis responsible for the age distribution of ourcollection, alternative explanations could includethe possibility of secondary burial elsewhere forsome adults, high fertility in the population, or


16/24

ANDEAN PAST 12(2016) - 146

post-depositional preservation factors. It is nota-ble that infants and children were present in thistomb alongside adults. This was not always thecase for juveniles in other pre-Hispanic Andeanpopulations. Kellner (2002) found subadultsunder-represented in a sample from three Nasca

cemeteries. She notes that this occurrence is notinfrequent in archaeology and posits it as apossible example of the Nasca mortuary practicesof interring some infants in unofficial cemeteriesand abandoned domestic sites (ibid.: 38). Theinclusion of juvenile remains in Chincha ceme-tery tombs suggests that juveniles underwentsimilar mortuary treatment to adults and pos-sessed community membership in the social unitsthat utilized such structures. Similarly, the equal

presence of male and female skeletons is consis-tent with Kurins (2012) findings for MiddleHorizon and LIPmachaytombs in highland Peru.

A mixed tomb population of more than sixtymales and females ranging from infants to ma-ture adults suggests that social relatedness, notage or sex, likely governed inclusion in the burialstructure. Baca et al. (2012) proposed that LateHorizon chullpainterment in southern highlandPeru reflected patrilineal family group organiza-

tion, based on mitochondrial DNA analysesshowing that occupants were more closely re-lated within a single tomb than across tombs.There are no indicators of disproportionateaccess to high-value goods based on comparativesurvey observations of more than forty middlevalley Chincha cemeteries. The fact that ceme-tery UC-012 shows dozens of such structures inclose proximity indicates that these socialgroups, although distinct from one another, co-operated through use of shared cemetery areasand potentially shared domestic centers.

While the exclusive association with LIPChincha material culture at middle valley chull-passuggests political affiliation with the Seoro,the scenario at the valleys neck appears alto-gether different. Few mound complexes exist

here, and almost none of the exceptions showheavy LIP occupation. While publication of ourinitial survey data is forthcoming, we emphasizethat domestic-related sites in the middle valley areusually small, terraced hillsides, in some cases witha stone fortification wall or redoubt. These resi-

dential areas are diminutive in size and appear tocorrespond with their own cemetery or set ofcemeteries. Each cemetery contains multiplechullpatombs. The appearance of mortuary enclo-sures containing lineage groups in this scenariosuggests, in the model of highland chullpabuildingpractices, that distinguishing independent socialgroups was an important and necessary socialpractice. Combined with the relatively decentral-ized settlement patterns of the middle valley area

and the presence of defensive refuges near LIPassociated sites, we suggest that contemporarycommunities in the middle valley did not undergotop-down territorial management from the coastalSeoro. Instead, by visibly marking territorialboundaries through multi-generational monumen-tal interment practices, they distinguished them-selves from neighboring communities, visitorstraveling to and from the highlands, and lowervalley populations.

CONCLUSIONS AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURERESEARCH

The tomb analyzed here is one of hundreds ofnearly identical structures in more than fortycemeteries clustered throughout the upper Chin-cha Valley. While the number of individualsrepresented in this tomb is surprisingly high, we donot believe that Tomb 043 of cemetery UC-012 isan outlier. Similar Chincha mortuary contextsshowing the same styles of material culture, com-mon architectural elements and constructiontechniques, and analogous positioning and orien-tation on the landscape, clearly once containedmultiple individuals. Expanding the sample oftombs through additional demographic analyseswould provide the larger database needed toattempt a reconstruction of LIP populations in the


17/24


upper valley. While we suggest that these tombsrepresent multiple generations and perhapsbiologically-linked social units, additional researchis required to support this hypothesis. Study ofaDNA, non-metric traits, and radiocarbon datingof osteological samples will provide information on

the lifespan of single tombs, the relatedness of theindividuals interred within singular tombs, and therelationship between disparate tombs in a singlecemetery. Future study can also compare bio-distance for the skeletal remains in the middlevalley and coast. While beyond the scope of thecurrent article, we observed a relevant amount ofcranial modification and cribra orbitalia in oursample; data related to these and other markers ofsocial and biological processes will aid in building

health and pathological profiles and strengtheningour identification of social units in mortuarypopulations. Similarly, gathering data on redpigments found on human remains will comple-ment our understanding of LIP Chincha post-mortem ritual practices.

Osteological analyses of remains from com-mingled and/or looted contexts and proposedprotocols for analyzing these types of data recog-nize the potential richness of these data sources

(Adams and Byrd 2008; Bauer-Clapp et al. 2012;Gerdau-Radonic and Herrera 2010; Lozada et al.2013; Valdez et al. 2002). Disturbed tombs arecompromised sites that are far from ideal in atraditional archaeological sense. However, a care-ful analytical study can still be performed bymaintaining an awareness of the inherent limita-tions of these site types. This osteological studyprovides new demographic data for LIP popula-tions in Chincha and will be expanded uponduring future seasons of research. Combined withethnohistorical demographic accounts, mortuarydata will not only profile the valleys inhabitants,but also address questions about the politicalscenario before and during Inca rule. Particularlyin regions where looted sites are abundant, it isimportant to recognize that these contexts can stillserve as significant sources of archaeological data

as multidisciplinary approaches combining archae-ology, human osteology, and ethnohistory con-tinue to enrich our understanding of the pre-columbian past.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors thank the Institute for Field Research, theNational Geographic Society, and the Cotsen Institute ofArchaeology. Benjamin T. Nigra and Jacob Bongers ac-knowledge the support of the National Science FoundationGraduate Research Fellowship Program (DGE-1144087) andtravel support from Charlie Steinmetz. Camille Weinbergthanks Victoria R. Starczak for statistical advice, andexpresses gratitude to the staff and students of the 2013Programa Arqueolgico Chincha field school. Jacob Bongersis grateful for support from the Ford Foundation FellowshipProgram, National Geographic Young Explorers GrantProgram, and Sigma Xi Grants-in-Aid of Research Program.

REFERENCES CITED

Adams, Bradley J. and Lyle W. Konigsberg2008 How Many People? Determining the Number of

Individuals Represented by Commingled HumanRemains. In Recovery, Analysis, and Identification ofCommingled Human Remains, edited by Bradley J.Adams and John E. Byrd, pp. 241-256. Totowa,New Jersey: Humana Press.

Adams, Bradley J. and John E. Byrd, editors2008 Recovery, Analysis, and Identification of Commingled

Human Remains. Totowa, New Jersey: HumanaPress.

Alcalde, Javier, Carlos del guila, Fernando Fujita, andEnrique Retamozo2002 Plateros precoloniales tardos en Tambo de Mora,

Valle de Chincha (Siglos XIV-XVI). Anales delMuseo de Amrica 10:43-57.

Arkush, Elizabeth2008 War, Causality, and Chronology in the Titicaca

Basin. Latin American Antiquity19(4):339-373.2011 Hillforts of the Ancient Andes: Colla Warfare, Society,

and Landscape.Gainesville: University Press of Flori-da.

Baca, Mateusz, Karolina Doan, Maciej Sobcyzk, AnnaStankovic, and Piotr Wgleski2012 Ancient DNA Reveals Kinship Burial Patterns of a

Pre-Columbian Andean Community. BioMedCentral Genetics 13:30, 11 pages.

Baitzel, Sarah I.2008 No Country for Old People: A Paleodemographic

Study of Tiwanaku Return Migration in Moquegua,Peru. Masters Thesis, University of California, SanDiego.


18/24

ANDEAN PAST 12(2016) - 148

Bass, William M.2005 Human Osteology: A Laboratory and Field Manual,

Fifth Edition. Columbia, Missouri: Missouri Archae-ological Society.

Bauer-Clapp, Heidi, Laura Solar Valverde, and Lisa Rios2012 The Blessing and the Curse of Taphonomic Pro-

cesses: A Bioarchaeological Analysis of a Shaft

Tomb from La Florida, Mexico. Landscapes ofViolence 2(2): Article 6.Blanton, Richard E.1994 Houses and Households: A Comparative Study. New

York: Plenum.Bongers, Jacob2014 Mortuary Monuments, Ancestor Veneration, and

Community-Building in the Mid-Chincha Valley, Peru.Masters thesis, University of California, Los An-geles.

Bongers, Jacob, Elizabeth Arkush, and Michael Harrower2012 Landscapes of Death: GIS-based Analyses of Chull-

pas in the Western Titicaca Basin. Journal of Ar-

chaeological Science 39:1687-1693.Buikstra, Jane E. and Douglas H. Ubelaker, editors1994 Standards for Data Collection from Human Skele-

tal Remains. Arkansas Archaeological Survey Re-search Series 44 (Fayetteville, Arkansas).

Canziani Amico, Jos1992 Arquitectura y urbanismo del perodo Paracas en el

valle de Chincha. Gaceta Arqueolgica Andina 6:87-117.

2009 Ciudad y territorio en los Andes. Lima: Fondo Edito-rial del Pontifica Universidad Catlica del Per.

Castro, Cristbal de and Diego de Ortega Morejn1934 [1558] Relacin del sitio del Cusco y principio de las

guerras civiles del Per hasta la muerte de Diego deAlmagro, 1535-1539: Relacin sobre el gobierno de losincas, edited by Horacio H. Urteaga. Lima: Librerae Imprenta Gil.

Cieza de Len, Pedro1959 [1553] Crnicas del Per. In Incas of Pedro Cieza de

Len, translated by Harriet de Onis and edited byVictor W. von Hagen, pp. 17-352. Norman: Uni-versity of Oklahoma Press.

Cobo, Father Bernabe1976 [1653] History of the Inka Empire: An Account of the

Indians Customs and their Origin Together with a

Treatise on Inca Legends, History, and Social Institu-tions. Austin: University of Texas Press.Crespo, Juan Carlos1978 Chincha y el mundo andino en la relacin de 1558.

Historia 2(2):185-212.Drusini, Andrea G., Nicola Carrara, Giuseppe Orefici, andMauricio Rippa Bonati2001 Palaeodemography of the Nasca Valley: Recon-

struction of the Human Ecology in the Southern

Peruvian Coast. HOMOJournal of ComparativeHuman Biology 52(2):157-172.

Engel, Frdric2010 Arqueologa indita de la costa peruana. Lima, Peru:

Asamblea Nacional de Rectores.Gerdau-Radonic, Karina and Alexander Herrera2010 Why Dig Looted Tombs? Two Examples and Some

Answers from Keushu (Ancash Highlands, Peru).Bulletins et Mmoires de la Socit dAnthropologie deParis 22(3-4):145-156.

Gintis, Herbert, Eric Alden Smith, and Samuel Bowles2001 Costly Signaling and Cooperation.Journal of Theo-

retical Biology 213:103-119.Goldstein, Paul2005 Andean Diaspora: The Tiwanaku Colonies and the

Origins of South American Empire. Gainesville:University Press of Florida.

Guamn Poma de Ayala, Phelipe2011 [c. 1615]Nueva crnica y buen gobierno. Lima: Ebisa

Ediciones.

Hyslop, John1979 Chullpas of the Lupaca Zone of the Peruvian High

Plateau.Journal of Field Archaeology 4:149-170.Isbell, William. H.1997 Mummies and Mortuary Monuments: A Post-

processual Prehistory of Central Andean Social Organi-zation. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Kellner, Corina M.2002 Coping with Environmental and Social Challenges in

Prehistoric Peru: Bioarchaeological Analyses of NascaPopulations. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cali-fornia, Santa Barbara. Ann Arbor, Michigan: UMIDissertation Publishing.

Kesseli, Risto and Martti Prssinen2005 Identidad tnica y muerte: Torres funerarias (chull-

pas) como smbolos de poder tnico en el altiplanoboliviano de Pakasa. Bulletin de lInstitut Franaisdtudes Andines 34(3):379-410.

Kroeber, Alfred L. and William D. Strong1924 The Uhle Collections from Ica. InAmerican Archae-

ology and Ethnology 21, edited by Alfred L. Kroeberand Robert H. Lowie, pp. 1-54. Berkeley: Universityof California Press.

Kurin, Danielle Shawn2012 The Bioarchaeology of Collapse: Ethnocide and Ethno-

genesis in Post-Imperial Andahuaylas, Peru (AD 900-1200). Ph.D. dissertation, Vanderbilt University,Nashville, Tennessee.

Lizrraga, Reginaldo de1968 [c. 1600/1909] Descripcin breve de todo la tierra del

Per, Tucumn, Ro de la Plata y Chile. Madrid: RealAcademia Espaola.

Lozada, Maria Cecilia, Augusto Cardona Rosas, and HansBarnard2013 Looting: Another Phase in the Social History of a


19/24


Pre-Hispanic Cemetery in Southern Peru.Backdirt:115-123.

Lumbreras, Luis G.2001 Uhle y los asentamientos de Chincha en el Siglo

XVI. Revista del Museo Nacional 49:13-87.Menzel, Dorothy1966 The Pottery of Chincha.awpa Pacha 4:77-144.

1976 Pottery Style and Society in Ancient Peru. Los An-geles: University of California Press.Menzel, Dorothy and John H. Rowe1966 The Role of Chincha in Late Pre-Spanish Peru.

awpa Pacha 4:63-76.Moore, Jerry D.1996 Architecture and Power in the Ancient Andes: The

Archaeology of Public Buildings. New York: Cam-bridge University Press.

Morris, Craig1988 Ms all de las fronteras de Chincha. InLa Frontera

del Estado Inca, edited by Tom D. Dillehay andPatricia J. Netherly, pp. 106-113. Oxford: British

Archaeological Reports, International Series 442.1998 Inka Strategies of Incorporation and Governance.

InArchaic States, edited by Gary M. Feinman andJoyce Marcus, pp. 293-309. Santa Fe, New Mexico:School of American Research Press.

2004 Enclosures of Power: The Multiple Spaces of InkaAdministrative Palaces. In Palaces of the AncientNew World, edited by Susan Toby Evans andJoanne Pillsbury, pp. 299-323. Washington, D.C.:Dumbarton Oaks.

Morris, Craig and R. Alan Covey2006 The Management of Scale or the Creation of Scale:

Administrative Processes in Two Inka Provinces. InIntermediate Elites in Pre-Columbian States andEmpires, edited by Christina M. Elson and R. AlanCovey, pp. 136-153. Tucson: University of ArizonaPress.

Morris, Craig and Julian I. Santillana2007 The Inka Transformation of the Chincha Capital.

In Variations in the Expressions of Inka Power, editedby Richard L. Burger, Craig Morris, and RamiroMatos Mendieta, pp. 135-163. Washington, D.C.:Dumbarton Oaks.

Nielsen, Axel E.2008 The Materiality of Ancestors: Chullpas and Social

Memory in the Late Prehispanic History of theSouth Andes. In Memory Work: Archaeologies ofMaterial Practices, edited by Barbara Mills andWilliam H. Walker, pp. 207-232. Santa Fe, NewMexico: School of American Research Press.

Nordenskild, Erland1953 Investigaciones Arqueolgicas en la Regin Fronteriza

de Per y Bolivia. La Paz: Biblioteca Pacea.Pizarro, Pedro1921 [1571] Relation of the Discovery and Conquest of the

Kingdoms of Peru, translated by Philip AinsworthMeans. New York: The Cortes Society.

Rapoport, Amos2006 Archaeology and Environment-Behavior Studies.

Archeological Papers of the American AnthropologicalAssociation 16:59-70.

Roksandic, Mirjana and Stephanie D. Armstrong

2011 Using the Life History Model to Set the Stage(s) ofGrowth and Senescence in Bioarchaeology andPaleodemography. American Journal of PhysicalAnthropology 145(3):337-347.

Rostworowski de Diez Canseco, Mara1970 Mercaderes del valle de Chincha en la poca pre-

hispnica: Un documento y unos comentarios.Revista Espaola de Antropologa Americana 5:135-177.

Rydn, Stig1947 Archeological Researches in the Highlands of Bolivia.

Gteborg, Sweden: Elanders BoktryckeriAktiebolag.

Sandweiss, Daniel H.1992 The Archaeology of Chincha Fishermen: Specialization

and Status in Inka Peru. Bulletin of the CarnegieMuseum of Natural History 29.

Stanish, Charles1992 Ancient Andean Political Economy. Austin: Univer-

sity of Texas Press.2012 Above-Ground Tombs in the Circum-Titicaca

Basin. InAdvances in Titicaca Basin Archaeology III,edited by Elizabeth A. Klarich, Alexei Vranich, andCharles Stanish, pp. 203-220. Memoirs of the Mu-seum of Anthropology51, Ann Arbor: University ofMichigan.

Tantalen, Henry2006 Regresar para construir: Prcticas funerarias e

ideologa(s) durante la ocupacin inka en Cutimbo,Puno-Per. Chungara, Revista de Antropologa Chile-na38(1):129-143.

Uhle, Max1924 [1901] Explorations at Chincha, edited by Alfred L.

Kroeber, pp. 55-94. Los Angeles: University ofCalifornia Publications in American Archaeology andEthnology 21(1).

Valdez, Lidio M., Katrina J. Bettcher, and J. Ernesto Valdez2002 New Wari Mortuary Structures in the Ayacucho

Valley, Peru. Journal of Anthropological Research58(3):389-407.Wallace, Dwight T.1971 Valles de Pisco y de Chincha. Arqueolgicas 13.

Lima: Museo Nacional de Antropologa yArqueologa.

1991 The Chincha Roads: Economics and Symbolism. InAncient Road Networks and Settlement Hierarchies inthe New World, edited by Charles D. Trombold, pp.253-263. New York: Cambridge University Press.


20/24

ANDEAN PAST 12(2016) - 150

Figure 1. Locations of Late Intermediate Period cemeteries identified in the upper Chincha Valley, Peru.Base map redrawn after Canziani 1992.


21/24


Figure 2. Cemetery UC-012 in the Chincha Valley, Peru.


22/24

ANDEAN PAST 12(2016) - 152

Figure 3. Tomb 043 at cemetery UC-012 prior to surface collection of human remains.This unit exhibits architectural characteristics, contents, and dimensions common to Late Intermediate Period

tombs in the upper Chincha Valley.


23/24


Figure 4. Interior of Tomb 043, showing disturbed contents including textilesand disarticulated human remains. The lower cavity was excavated by looters.


24/24

ANDEAN PAST 12(2016) - 154

Figure 5. Distribution across (nearly) all age categories required for categorizing the complete collection;see Table 4 for several additional femora, fibulae, tibiae, radii, and humeri age categories needed to describe

those bones that were not in these juvenile or adult categories.

Weinberg et al. 2016. LIP Tomb in the Chincha Valley

Documents

Transcript of Weinberg et al. 2016. LIP Tomb in the Chincha Valley