Mobile Communities and Pastoralist Landscapes during the Formative Period in the Central Altiplano...

The domestication of South Americancamelids (llamas and alpacas) is consid-ered a major landmark in Andean prehis-

tory (Bonavia 2008; Browman 2008; Dransart2002; Mengoni-Goñalons and Yacobaccio 2006;Wheeler 1995). Through specialized herdingstrategies, Andean societies enhanced their adap-

tation to high-altitude montane arid and semi-arid environments and developed significant tra-ditions of food production, textile manufacture,and inter-regional exchange. Although anthro-pologists have addressed many aspects of An-dean pastoralism, there are still a number of unan-swered questions regarding the origins of early

MOBILE COMMUNITIES AND PASTORALIST LANDSCAPES DURINGTHE FORMATIVE PERIOD IN THE CENTRAL ALTIPLANO OF

BOLIVIA

José M. Capriles

The domestication of llamas and alpacas was fundamental for the cultural and economic development of Andean societies,but the origins of camelid pastoralism as a distinct mode of socioeconomic organization remain little understood. Whereasmost archaeological interpretations of prehispanic highland societies emphasize the transition from hunting-gathering toagriculture as a process marked by the establishment of agricultural sedentary villages, other subsistence and mobilitystrategies have been for the most part overlooked. A case in point is the Wankarani cultural complex from the Central Alti-plano of Bolivia, which has been interpreted as an example of an early village-based sedentary society. Here, I argue thata model of mobile pastoralism based on ethnoarchaeological research better explains the Central Altiplano’s Formativeperiod archaeological record. Recently collected data support this proposition. Settlement patterns consisted of multipledispersed camps attached to residential bases occupied recurrently. Horizontal excavations from a residential base revealedstructures and features analogous to pastoralist landscapes documented around the world. Faunal identification confirmedthe preponderance of domesticated camelids. Based on this evidence, I argue that we need better explanatory frameworksfor approaching the origins, organization, and variability associated with early food producing societies such as mobilecamelid pastoralists.

La domesticación de llamas y alpacas fue fundamental para el desarrollo cultural y económico de las sociedades andinas. Sinembargo, el origen del pastoreo de camélidos como un distintivo modo de organización socioeconómica permanece pocoentendido. Considerando que la mayoría de las interpretaciones arqueológicas acerca de las sociedades prehispánicas delaltiplano hacen hincapié en que la transición de la caza y recolección hacia la agricultura fue un proceso marcado por elestablecimiento de aldeas agrícolas sedentarias, la importancia de otras estrategias de subsistencia y movilidad ha sido, ensu mayor parte, desestimada. Como ejemplo está el complejo cultural Wankarani del Período Formativo del altiplano centralde Bolivia, que ha sido previamente caracterizado como un ejemplo de sociedad temprana basada en aldeas. En contraste,aquí se propone que un modelo de pastoreo móvil basado en investigación etnoarqueológica y etnográfica explica mejor elregistro arqueológico del Período Formativo en altiplano central. Datos recientemente recolectados de prospección, excava-ción y análisis de fauna apoyan esta proposición. Los patrones de asentamiento consistieron de múltiples campamentos dis-persos conectados a bases residenciales ocupadas recurrentemente. Excavaciones horizontales de una base residencialrevelaron la existencia de superposiciones de rasgos y estructuras análogas a otras halladas en paisajes pastoriles docu-mentados alrededor del mundo. La identificación de fauna confirmó la preponderancia de camélidos domesticados como labase dietética, pero también el consumo generalizado de recursos silvestres, probablemente procurados durante paseos depastoreo. En base a esta evidencia, se argumenta que se necesitan mejores marcos explicativos así como adecuadas estrate-gias metodológicas para abordar los orígenes, la organización y la variabilidad asociada con las sociedades tempranas pro-ductoras de alimentos a escala de subsistencia tales como los pastores móviles de camélidos en los Andes.

José M. Capriles � Instituto de Alta Investigación, Universidad de Tarapacá, Antofagasta 1520, Casilla 6-D, Arica, Chile([email protected])

Latin American Antiquity 25(1), 2014, pp. 3–26Copyright © 2014 by the Society for American Archaeology

3

Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

4 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 25, No. 1, 2014

camelid pastoralism. How did increased relianceon animal herding affect processes of populationaggregation and sedentarization? Was earlycamelid pastoralism related to specific mobilitystrategies? How were early pastoralist landscapesstructured?

Situated above 3,600 m asl and spanning fromLake Titicaca to the Atacama Desert, the Altiplanoforms the broadest continuous highland terrain inthe Andes (Figure 1). The shores of Lake Titicacahave the most productive conditions for agricul-ture, and during the Formative period (1500B.C.–A.D. 500) witnessed the emergence of

sedentism and sociopolitical complexity (Alba -rracín-Jordán 2007; Hastorf 2008; Janusek 2008;Kolata 2003; Stanish 2003). Toward the south, thecentral and southern highlands are increasinglyarid and possess comparatively inferior environ-mental conditions for plant cultivation, but his-torically sustained some of the largest popula-tions of llamas in the Andes (Bonavia 2008;Cardozo 1981; Nielsen 2009). Unfortunately, thesignificance of camelid herding in the CentralAltiplano has been understated in archaeologicalnarratives, which emphasize the role of agricul-ture1 and sedentary village life. Archaeological re-

Figure 1. The Bolivian Altiplano and the distribution of the Formative period Wankarani cultural complex.

Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

search associated with the Wankarani culturalcomplex provides a good example.

Carlos Ponce (1970) defined the Wankaraniculture by the presence of mounded settlementsformed by overlapping layers of domestic occu-pations composed of circular houses with stonefoundations and adobe walls, undecorated ce-ramics, and the occurrence of large stone sculp-tures probably representing llama heads (Figure2). Because some Wankarani sites had a mound-like appearance and deep stratigraphy, Ponce(1980) used the analogy of Near Eastern tells forinterpreting these sites as ancient overlapping vil-lages. In fact, extrapolating from Gordon Childe’s(1951) theory of the origin of civilization in theNear East, Ponce (1970, 1972, 1980) speculatedthat the Wankarani, along with Chiripa (a culturedistributed on the southeastern shores of LakeTiticaca), formed the village (i.e., Neolithic) stageand societal substrate that preceded the emer-gence of the Tiwanaku urban revolution.

More recent research regarding the Formativeperiod of the Central Altiplano has focused on un-

derstanding the spatial distribution and early res-idential life of Wankarani settlements (Ayala et al.2008; Bermann and Estévez 1995; Fox 2007;McAndrews 1998; Rose 2001a). This work hasbroadened our comprehension of the Wankaranicultural complex by providing new insights intoits settlement location, material culture, andchronology. Nevertheless, the assumption thatWankarani settlements consisted of permanentlyoccupied sedentary agricultural villages remainedunchallenged as the predominant interpretation ofthis society (e.g., Bruhns 1994; Janusek 2004;Kolata 1993; Moseley 2001).

In this paper, I revisit current interpretations ofthe Wankarani cultural complex by utilizing atheoretical perspective that emphasizes the mate-rial correlates of pastoralist societies. Based on acomparative framework for approaching the ar-chaeology of pastoralist landscapes, I analyzesettlement patterns, site structure, and faunal datarecently collected from the region of Iroco in theCentral Altiplano of Bolivia. As a result, I suggestthat the Wankarani cultural complex was an ex-

Capriles] MOBILE COMMUNITIES AND PASTORALIST LANDSCAPES IN THE CENTRAL ALTIPLANO 5

Figure 2. Stone tenon heads representing camelids often found in Wankarani sites. Center piece is approximately 70 cmtall. (Photograph taken at the Museo Antropológico Eduardo López Rivas in Oruro.)

Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

ample of early herding society, constituted not byaggregated sedentary agriculturists but by com-munities of mobile pastoralists.

Mobile Pastoralism as a Social and Economic Subsistence System

Pastoralism is an economic subsistence systembased on animal husbandry and mobility (Cribb1991; Dyson-Hudson and Dyson-Hudson 1980;Ingold 1980; Khazanov 1994; Salzman 2004).The most important product of pastoralism is thetransformation of plant cellulose into energy,which herders can directly utilize as meat protein,fat, marrow, blood, and milk. Other animal hus-bandry-derived products and services includemilk by-products, animal power for transportationand traction, dung for fuel and fertilizer, and rawmaterial from fiber, hides, bones, and horns. Al-though pastoralist societies generally comple-ment their subsistence activities with other taskssuch as cultivation, exchange, and even huntingand gathering, their primary goal is to secure for-age and protection for their animal herds. Conse-quently, pastoralism is more than an economic ac-tivity and includes other ecological, social,political, and ideological aspects (Chang 2006;Gifford-Gonzales 2005).

Different pastoralist strategies evolved in di-verse regions of the world, especially in environ-ments where agriculture was risky, unproductive,or altogether unfeasible (Frachetti 2008). Becausecultivation in arid and semi-arid grassland envi-ronments is hampered by (among other factors)poor soils, low water availability, and low and un-predictable year-to-year rainfall, pastoralism inthese ecosystems is generally a more efficientsubsistence strategy than farming (Marshall et al.2011). Moreover, pastoralism is often consideredan optimal risk management strategy in certainenvironments because it allows coping with en-vironmental variability by relying on mobile liv-ing animals rather than on spatially bounded an-nual harvests (Browman 1987, 1997).

Through mobility, pastoralist communities uti-lize their landscape in diverse ways and accord-ing to different economic, social, and environ-mental constraints. Variable levels of residentialand logistical mobility characterize pastoralistsocieties because herds require different feeding

grounds or pastures as previous ones become de-pleted (Abdi 2003; Cribb 1991). These move-ments often involve repeated residential reloca-tion that can occur at different time scales, fromseasonal to yearly to decadal and even centennial,depending on a combination of ecological and so-cial factors. Khazanov (1994) identified mobilityas one of the central aspects associated with pas-toralist societies, and therefore classified it in acontinuum that ranges from fully nomadic to al-most sedentary. Moreover, Binford’s (1980)hunter-gatherer strategies of residential and lo-gistical mobility have also been successfully ap-plied to mobile pastoralist groups (Chang 2006).A more recent conceptualization of mobility in-volves assessing combinations of variables interms of moment (length of movement), motion(pattern of the movement), motivation (reasonfor movement), and segment (social groups in-volved) (Wendrich and Barnard 2008).

Andean herding communities share a numberof similarities with pastoralist societies aroundthe world. In the Andes, indigenous peoples pro-vide an outstanding source of comparative analo-gies for reconstructing ancient pastoralism. Ethno-graphers and ethnohistorians have described thebasic features of a number of herding communitiesin the Andes (Abercrombie 1998; Browman 1974;Dedenbach-Salazar 1990; Dransart 2002; Flores1979; Medinacelli 2010; Orlove 1977; Wachtel2001). Of course, as with every other source ofanalogy, not all of this information can be directlyapplied to the archaeological record. Modern An-dean communities have not persisted unchanged,yet ethnoarchaeological studies provide a majorsource for constructing well-informed relationalanalogies about specific aspects of the archaeo-logical record left behind by ancient societies(Wylie 2002). Certainly, ethnoarchaeological re-search has been carried out on a number of mod-ern herding communities addressing aspects asvaried as organization of domestic space, demog-raphy, landscape management, formationprocesses, and caravan exchange (Aldenderfer2001; Caracotche 2001; Flannery et al. 1989; Kuz-nar 1995, 2001; Lane 2009; Nielsen 2000; Núñezand Nielsen 2011; Tomka 1994; Tripcevich 2007).

Together these data can be used to infer a gen-eral model of Andean mobile pastoralism that, interms of regional configuration, would be charac-


Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

terized by dispersed residential bases, usually oc-cupied by single nuclear households, and associ-ated with logistical and seasonal occupied herdingcamps and miscellaneous landscape features suchas roads, trails, and religious sites. In contrast topermanently settled agricultural villages, thesesettlements should be small, dispersed, and pro-visional. At the settlement level, features presentin contemporary and historic pastoralist residentialbases typically include a residential compoundattached to animal handling facilities such as cor-rals. Residential compounds consist of dormitoryand storage structures, indoor and outdoor work-ing and cooking areas with hearths, animalbutchering areas, windbreaks, trash disposal mid-dens and pits, and piles of fuel (Kuznar1995:55–56; Tomka 1994, 2001; Yacobaccio andMadero 2001). Animal penning facilities usuallyinclude one to a few corrals of different sizes, aswell as piles of animal dung. Herding campsshould typically include features such as smallsheltered areas, corrals, caches of artifacts, and apreponderance of discarded domesticated camelidbone remains (Kuznar 1995:56; Tomka 1993). Inaddition, given the high rate of mobility that char-acterizes most herding societies, the location ofthese features will shift and involve frequent aban-donment and reoccupation cycles that, in time,should result in the creation of a pastoralist land-scape (Frachetti 2008).

The aforementioned attributes are present inethnographically observed Aymara herding com-munities of the Central Altiplano (Cuenca et al.2005). Here, pastoralists move between theirjach’a uta, or main residences and attached cor-rals, and their anaqa, or pastures, which arespread throughout different seasonally variablemicroenvironments where they keep differenttemporary camps known as janta (López 2003).These places frequently contain material accu-mulations of many generations of use and havenames and stories that document the long-termhistory of their utilization memorialized throughvarious rituals (Abercrombie 1998).

Archaeological sites that were created and oc-cupied by pastoralist groups in the Altiplano arehypothesized to include a settlement organiza-tion and site structure that resembles attributes ofthe model outlined above. More specifically, if theWankarani cultural complex was an example of

early camelid pastoralist society, I expect to ob-serve intersite settlement patterns and intrasitestructure features consistent with a cross-culturalpastoralist model of spatial organization. Alter-natively, the presence of sedentary villages shouldinclude evidence of large nucleated settlementscomposed of multi-room residential compounds,corporate architecture (i.e., temples), and land-scape features such as large storage facilities,agricultural fields, and terraces (Bandy and Fox2010; Flannery 1972, 2002). Furthermore, earlysettled agricultural village life has been connectedto the Neolithic demographic transition, a processcharacterized by a sharp increase in populationgrowth variously manifested in the archaeologi-cal record as sharp increases in settlement num-ber, size, and frequencies of buried individuals(Bandy 2005; Bellwood and Oxenham 2008;Bocquet-Appel 2002).

Materials and MethodsI carried out survey and excavations in Iroco, a re-gion located within the Central Altiplano of Bo-livia, and the known distribution area of the For-mative period Wankarani cultural complex(Capriles 2011; Capriles et al. 2011). The Irocolandscape consists of alluvial plains, foothills,and hill-slopes covered by open grasslands andshrublands, which produce optimal visibility andaccessibility conditions for carrying out archaeo-logical research. I implemented a high-intensityfull-coverage survey to characterize the settle-ment patterns of the study area for the entire pe-riod of human occupation but primarily for theFormative period. The survey boundaries wereconstrained by the extent of the communities ofCochiraya, Iroco, and Chuzekery, and the north-ern shore of Lake Uru-Uru.

During survey a “site” was operationalized asa discrete concentration of archaeological arti-facts with a density greater than one artifact persquare meter and/or visible evidence of architec-ture such as terraces, walls or burials. Spacing be-tween surveyors varied between 5 and 15 m. Theperimeter of every site was determined in thefield and recorded with the track function of aGPS. Each site was assigned to one or more of thefollowing cultural components: Archaic, Forma-tive, Tiwanaku, Carangas/Sora (Late Intermediate


Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

period), Inca, Colonial, Republican, and indeter-minate. To specify the layout and activities thattook place in the Formative period settlements, Icarried out horizontal excavations in one settle-ment, KCH21. Faunal analysis involved identifi-cation of all the bone specimens recovered fromthe excavations to the most specific taxonomiclevel (Reitz and Wing 2008).

Iroco Formative Period Settlement PatternsAn area of 38.35 km2 was surveyed and a total of45 Formative period sites were recorded (Figure3). The cumulative surface area of these sites is14.51 ha. The average site size is .32 ha (s = .48),and the density of recorded settlements amountedto 1.17 sites per km2. The nearest neighbor aver-age distance between sites was 212 m, suggestinga strong clustering pattern (expected mean dis-tance = 508 m, nearest neighbor ratio = .42, Zscore = -7.48, p < .001).

The Formative period settlements at Iroco con-sisted of relatively dense surface scatters of ce-ramic sherds, stone tools, and eroding architecture(Capriles et al. 2011). Only 10 sites were largerthan .5 ha, and these have substantial evidence ofdomestic occupation. If just these 10 large sitesare analyzed, the results of the nearest neighboranalysis suggest a pattern of dispersion (observedmean distance = 1018 m, expected mean distance= 592 m, nearest neighbor ratio = 1.72, Z score =4.34, p < .001) and support the interpretation ofthese sites as residential bases. In fact, large set-tlements typically include surface architecture,including wall foundations of circular and semi-circular structures composed of large boulders,patches of burned ground, and high densities offragmented ceramics. Some of the larger sitesseem to have formed as a consequence of redun-dant occupation and reoccupation of the same lo-cation over time. The average height of the 10largest sites is 1.25 m (s = .82), and in this respectthey strongly resemble the mounds typically as-sociated with the Wankarani cultural complexelsewhere (Figure 4) (Bermann and Estévez 1995;Ponce 1970; Walter 1966; Wasson 1967).

The rest of the Formative period sites (n = 35)were mostly identified as artifact dispersions andwere probably occupied as logistical temporary orseasonal herding camps. Although several of these

sites are located very close to larger sites, this isconsistent with temporary logistical mobility. Be-cause of their composition and content, it is alsounlikely that all of these sites were occupied si-multaneously and continuously throughout theFormative period. Nevertheless, some of the smallsites clearly had significant and dense occupationssuggesting recurrent reoccupation. The distribu-tion of settlements suggests the existence of fiveto seven clusters of residential bases associatedwith herding camps. These clusters follow theeastern shore of the Karakollu River and the west-ern foothills in strategic and intermediate loca-tions for utilizing various microenvironments.

During survey, no evidence of large settle-ments or visible corporate architecture was noted,and the only terraces discovered seem to be datedto the subsequent Tiwanaku period. More impor-tantly, the settlement pattern associated with theFormative period seems to reflect a broad use ofthe available space to optimize access to grazingareas. Sites are located in relation to accessibilityfor key resources such as springs and seasonallyavailable pastures. The spacing between residen-tial sites and the scattered distribution of smallcamps is compatible with a model of camelidpastoralism.

Site Structure and Composition in IrocoSite KCH21, also known as Irucirca, is a one-me-ter high mound that roughly covers .55 ha. Thesite was discovered in 2002 and excavated in2005 and 2007 (Albarracín-Jordán 2005:110–144;Capriles 2008:33–50). In total, 413 m2 were ex-posed in a single continuous block (Figure 5). Ex-cavations emphasized horizontal exposure, sowhenever floors and well-preserved features werediscovered, excavations proceeded in adjacentblocks (Figure 6). The exposed occupation layoutcorresponds to structures and features from threeoverlapping components or occupation levels.Stratigraphically, the site overlays sandy-clayloam strata of graded bedded natural alluviumand illuviated oxidized reddish clays.

The Lower Level is composed of a series of cir-cular to sub-circular structures along with a num-ber of additional features and outdoor activity ar-eas. Although the presence of actual adobe blockssuggests that these structures were built with mud


Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM


!

!

G

!

G

!

!

!!G

!!!

!

!!

!

!G

!

G

!

!

!G

G

!

G !

!!!!

G

G!

!

!

!

!! !

!!!

692000

692000

696000

696000

700000

700000

8010000

8010000

8010000

8010000

8020000

8020000

Lake Uru-uru

Lake Uru-uru

KCH121KCH54

KCH56 KCH131

KCH59

KCH20

KCH21

KCH35

KCH11

KCH157

Kar

akol

lu R

iver

Legend

Formative Period

Topography

ContourValue

Perimeter of the Survey

! Camp (<0.5 ha)G Residential base (>0.5 ha)

River

Lake

High : 4040

Low : 370038003900

4000

0 31.5 Km

t

Figure 3. Settlement pattern of the Formative period in Iroco.

Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

bricks, because of preservation it is not clearwhether some walls might have been built alsowith tapia and/or sod blocks. At least eight circu-lar to semicircular structures were identified andexposed during excavations. These structures varybetween 2.4 and 3.7 m in diameter and 3.7 and 8.8m in surface area (Table 1). Dark and organicallyrich fill overlay the slightly concave compactedclay floors of these structures, giving them the ap-pearance of semi-subterranean buildings. Onlythree of the circular structures contained a centralhearth, but there seems to be no correlation be-tween structure size and presence of hearths. In-terestingly enough, the smaller and more regularlyshaped structures have hearths in their interior,whereas the larger more amorphous structurescontain pits in their interiors and exteriors. A pre-liminary interpretation of this pattern suggests thatthe circular structures included residential do-mestic activities such as sleeping, heating, andpossibly cooking. The larger semicircular struc-tures might have served mostly storage purposes.

Small (20–70 cm) circular pits are located bothinside and outside the structures and surroundmost structures. The diversity in size, shape, dis-

tribution, and contents of the pits, suggests mul-tiple functions, including storage, trash disposal,and even supporting large concave jars. Somepits are located immediately adjacent to the walls,suggesting that these might have been post moldsand that some pits were excavated after aban-donment. Even though the distribution of thestructures throughout the excavated portion ofthe Lower Level seems uneven, at least threegroupings or clusters of two to three structureswere identified (west, center, and east). The in-termediate spaces between these groupings con-tain a number of features suggesting that severalactivities occurred in the exterior of the struc-tures. Outside activity areas are delimited by thestructures themselves, as well as by collapsedadobe walls, suggesting the presence of addi-tional structures and/or patio walls. Outside areasalso include the presence of circular pits, organicstains, middens, ground stones, and hearths, alongwith varying densities of cultural materials, sug-gesting that various activities took place in theselocations.

The overlying Upper Level included twomedium-sized circular structures with stone foun-


Figure 4. Site KCH157 viewed from the southwest with the characteristic mound configuration of Formative periodWankarani cultural complex sites.

Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

dations associated with open spaces, a large cir-cular structure, and a burial area. The two possi-ble domestic structures were identified by thepresence of boulders and cobbles on their wallfoundations, in addition to adobe. Structure 3 hada regular circular shape with a diameter of 2.25 m,

and its interior contained organic soil but nohearth. Structure 7 had a slightly oval shape, a di-ameter of 2.15 m, and a hearth, despite its smallersize. A large circular feature, Structure 1, inter-preted here as a corral, measured about 11 by 10m and occupied an area of about 81 m2 (Figure 7).


2

1

8

4

39

7

5

6

19 1820

16

22 24

15 13

21

12

26

23

14

10

17

11

27

28

Structure 1

Structure 6

Structure 5

Structure 4Structure 10

Structure 8

Structure 3

Structure 2

Structure 9

Structure 7

Structure 11

Burial 1

Burial 4

Burial 6

Burial 11Burial 8

Burial 2Burial 7

Burial 5Burial 9

Burial 10

Burial 3

/0 2 41 Meters

Site KCH21

E695468 N8013272

UppermostStructures

Dog Burial

Upper Level

Lower Level

Figure 5. Composite plan of excavations recorded at KCH21.

Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

The structure has a circular shape, slightly elon-gated on its sides. The walls of this structure arepartially delimited by large calcareous boulders,at least seven of which included holes, as if theywere meant to support poles. Consequently, it ispossible that the walls were made of a combina-tion of rocks and wooden fences. The holes alsomight have been used to support the gate or en-

trance of the structure, which, given a gap in thepresence of boulders, seems to have been locatedtoward the east. The floor of Structure 1 wascomposed of a dark, compact, and organicallyenriched matrix. The sandy sediment underneaththe floor was devoid of any cultural material. Inaddition, 11 burials containing 20 individuals,most of whom were children (n = 12), were found


Figure 6. Excavations at KCH21 viewed from the south. Grid lines are 4 m long. (Photograph courtesy of JuanAlbarracín-Jordán.)

Table 1. Structures and Associated Features Excavated at KCH21.

Hearth Hearth Pits PitsFeature Diameter Surface Shape Complete Inside Outside Inside Outside Entrance LevelStructure 1 11 81.13 Circular 100% No No 2 0 E Upper Structure 2 2.4 3.86 Circular 100% Yes No 0 12 S Lower Structure 3 2.25 4.27 Circular 100% No No 0 0 E Upper Structure 4 3 7.04 Circular 100% Yes No 0 3 S Lower Structure 5 3.6 7.18 Irregular 90% No Yes 10 2 SW Lower Structure 6 3.7 8.82 Irregular 100% No Yes 5 4 NE Lower Structure 7 2.15 3.15 Circular 100% Yes No 0 0 E Upper Structure 8 2.7 5.75 Circular 100% Yes Yes 0 4 SW Lower Structure 9 2.4 3.7 Sub-rectangular 100% No Yes 0 5 SW Lower Structure 10 3.4 7.1 Irregular 80% No No 1 1 SW Lower Structure 11 2.5 3.12 Semi-circular 50% No Yes 1 8 S Lower

Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

attached to the southeastern portion of the wall ofStructure 1 (Capriles 2011:Table 7.4).

A final occupation level recorded at KCH21includes two linear north-to-south collapsed wallsof rock boulders located in the northeast, an as-sociated occupation surface, and a dog burial inthe northwest of the site. The rocks for the wallsseem to have been reutilized from dismantling thewalls of Structure 1. Although the chronology ofthis level is uncertain, the sporadic presence of Ti-wanaku ceramics suggests that following theabandonment of the Upper Level, the site mighthave continued to be used as a temporary or shortduration herding camp.

A set of 11 radiocarbon dates (Table 2) bracketthe lower and upper occupation levels of KCH21between 202 cal B.C. and 231 cal A.D. The over-lap between these levels is not completely verti-cal, an attribute typically observed in Wankaranisettlements (Fox 2007; Rose 2001a). Consideringthat the entire occupation of the site did not extendover a long period of time, the frequent remodel-

ing of the site suggests dynamic cycles of occu-pation and abandonment possibly related to sea-sonal, yearly, or intergenerational residential mo-bility patterns. Furthermore, excavations suggestthat, although a few additional structures might bepresent towards the northeast, less than ten struc-tures were occupied in the entire settlement at anygiven time.Faunal Remains from IrocoThe faunal assemblage from KCH21 included 21non-overlapping taxa, dominated by camelids(Table 3). Other frequent taxa included killifishes,coots, ducks, flamingoes, deer, tuco-tuco gophers,and various aquatic and terrestrial birds. A scallopand a mussel from the Pacific Ocean that were as-sociated with ritual offerings were the only iden-tified non-highland taxa. With some exceptions,such as tuco-tuco gophers and dogs, most speci-mens of wild fauna had evidence of direct humanconsumption, such as cut or burning marks, sug-gesting that procurement of wild resources from


Figure 7. Structure 1 at KCH21 viewed from the west. Horizontal distance between walls is approximately 10 m.(Photograph courtesy of Juan Albarracín-Jordán.)

Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

different highland microenvironments comple-mented camelid herding (Capriles 2011). Fish aresurprisingly abundant using the number of iden-tified specimens (NISP) as the quantification unit,but if weight is used instead, camelid bones rep-resent over 90 percent of the identified taxa.Moreover, fish remains are mostly found in a fewspecific trash pit features, as opposed to camelids,which are ubiquitous throughout the site.

Given the difficulty of identifying camelidbone fragments to a species level, I relied onmorphometric approaches to assess size varia-tion and ultimately interspecific determination.Figure 8 compares a modern average llama stan-dard (Kent 1982) to log-transformed measure-ments from various postcranial elements(Meadow 1999). The results suggest that most an-imals in the assemblage group were of the aver-age size of modern llamas, but also that a wide va-riety of smaller and larger individuals (such aswild vicuña and guanaco) are present in the as-semblage.

In sum, faunal identification shows severalthings, most importantly, that camelid, and morespecifically llamas, dominate the Iroco Formativeperiod assemblages. In correspondence with pa-leoclimatologic reconstructions, faunal data alsoverify that the local environment was seasonallyhumid (Rigsby et al. 2005), which would have fa-vored the abundance of locally available wild re-sources in tandem with the expansion of pas-toralist communities.

Pastoralist Landscapes, Mobility, andWankarani Villages

Ethnographically and ethnoarchaeologically doc-umented modern pastoralist settlement systems inthe Andes and elsewhere in the world are charac-terized by residential bases located near high-quality grazing areas and complemented by acomplex set of temporal and seasonally occupiedlogistical herding camps (e.g., Bernbeck 2008;Cribb 1991; Flores 1979; Kuznar 1990, 1995;Tomka 1994, 2001; Vining 2011; Wendrich andBarnard 2008). In contrast to this expectation,Formative period Wankarani cultural complexsites have been described previously as strati-graphically complex mounds and interpreted aspermanently occupied agricultural villages(Bermann and Estévez 1995; Fox 2007, 2010;McAndrews 1998, 2005a; Ponce 1970; Rose2001a, 2001b). Comparing the results of the Irocosurvey with those of the La Joya survey carriedout by Timothy McAndrews (2005b), currentlythe only other available regional survey from theCentral Altiplano, I illustrate why the Wankaraniintersite spatial organization is better explained bya pastoralist model than by an agricultural one.

The survey carried out by McAndrews (1998,2005a) covers an area of 427 km2 (comprising theareas of La Joya, Río Kochi, and Belén) in which18 Formative period sites were identified, pro-ducing a density of .04 sites per km2 (Figure 9).These sites have a mean size of 1.12 ha (s = .53),height of 2.72 m (s = 1.9), and distance to their


Table 2. Radiocarbon Dates from KCH21 at Iroco.

Lab Code 14C Years BP δ13C Cal B.C./A.D. (1σ) Cal B.C./A.D. (2σ) Material Cultural ContextA14404 1925 ± 60 -23.5 A.D. 77–221 A.D. 2–324 Carbon Hearth of Structure 8AA84149 1993 ± 38 -24.2 A.D. 22–124 43 B.C.–A.D. 208 Carbon Occupation surfaceAA84151 1995 ± 57 -19.7 18 B.C.–A.D. 129 86 B.C.–A.D. 231 Carbon Pit outside Structure 2AA84152 2016 ± 57 -23.2 39 B.C.–A.D. 119 107 B.C.–A.D. 214 Carbon Hearth outside Structure 11AA84146 2058 ± 53 -24.2 86 B.C.–A.D. 68 165 B.C.–A.D. 123 Carbon Pit outside Structure 1AA84150 2059 ± 57 -22.7 88 B.C.–A.D. 70 168 B.C.–A.D. 125 Carbon Pit outside Structure 10AA84148 2061 ± 53 -22.2 87 B.C.–A.D. 66 167 B.C.–A.D. 122 Carbon Pit outside Structure 9A14403 2070 ± 70 -23 108 B.C.– A.D. 68 341 B.C.–A.D. 133 Carbon Fill above floor Structure 5AA91571 2076 ± 39 -23.7 88 B.C.–A.D. 29 162 B.C.–A.D. 70 Carbon Cultural fillAA84147 2109 ± 53 -22.8 161 B.C.–A.D. 2 202 B.C.–A.D. 68 Carbon Pit outside Structure 10AA91570 2185 ± 39 -25.7 341–61 B.C. 356–61 B.C. Carbon Floor of Structure 1Note: All calibrated dates were produced using Calib 6.0 (Stuiver and Reimer 1993) and the SHCal04 southern hemisphereatmospheric curve (McCormac et al. 2004).

Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

nearest neighbor of 3.5 km (s = .4). In compari-son, the Iroco Formative period settlement patternincludes 45 settlements with a density of 1.17sites per km2, or double the number of sites in atenth of the survey area. The mean site size anddistance to the nearest neighbor was also signifi-cantly different between the La Joya and Irocosurveys. If the smallest sites recorded in Iroco (<.5 ha) are excluded from the comparison, severaldifferences between the two datasets persist andsome important similarities are underscored. A setof t-tests indicates significant differences in ele-vation above sea level (t = -4.11, p < .001), dis-

tance to river (t = -2.5, p = .05), site height (t = -2.87, p < .01) and distance to nearest neighbor (t= -4.96, p < .001), but not in settlement area (t =.54, p = .59). The elevation and distance to rivervary considerably among sites recorded in thetwo surveys, and this is probably a consequenceof the much larger area sampled in La Joya.

The spacing between sites is also substantiallygreater in La Joya than in Iroco. Unlike the dis-persion observed within the Iroco settlement pat-tern, the Formative sites in La Joya— independently of the actual distance between them— show an evenly spread distribution (ob-


Table 3. Number of Identified Specimens (NISP) Faunal Remains from KCH21.

Taxa Common Name Lower Level Upper Level Uppermost Level TotalMammalsCamelidae Camelids 1055 1537 525 3117Cervidae Deer 13 15 15 43Canidae Canids 1 2 83 86Caviinae Guinea pigs 21 12 11 44Ctenomyidae Tuco-tuco gophers 14 47 2 63Sigmodontinae New World mice 4 3 7Artiodactyla Large-size mammals 839 1106 322 2267Hystricognathi Medium-size rodents 14 14 1 29

BirdsAnatidae Ducks 61 42 6 109Ardeidae Herons 2 9 1 12Charadriidae Plovers 1 3 4Laridae Gulls 2 1 3Phoenicopteridae Flamingos 3 58 2 63Podicipedidae Grebes 3 3Rallidae Coots 65 51 12 128Rheidae Rheas 2 37 2 41Strigidae Owls 1 1Threskiornithidae Ibis 1 1Tinamidae Tinamous 1 3 4Indeterminate 116 130 18 264Egg-shells 4 35 39

FishesOrestias Killifishes - bones 194 1897 4 2095Orestias (Scales) Killifishes - scales 115 2084 2199Trichomycterus Catfishes 4 48 52Indeterminate 168 288 456

MicrofaunaIndeterminate Small vertebrates 36 47 12 95

MolluscaBivalvia Scallops and mussels 2 2Gastropoda Snails 2 24 26

Total NISP 2739 7495 1019 11253

Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

served mean distance = 3,518 m, expected meandistance = 4,092 m, nearest neighbor ratio = .85,Z score = -1.13, p = .255). Moreover, althoughseveral sites in Iroco have the shape of mounds,the sites in La Joya are on average a meter and ahalf taller than sites in Iroco.

The strongest similarity between the two areasis the size of the sites themselves. However, thisequivalence disappears if all the smaller sites (<.5 ha) recorded in the Iroco survey are included inthe comparison. Given the available information,it seems that methodological differences betweenthe studies accentuated the observed variation.Notable differences between the two studies in-clude the absence of sites smaller than .5 ha in LaJoya and the closely spaced distribution of sites inIroco. I attribute these dissimilarities to differen-tial survey intensity, mostly consisting of closerspacing between surveyors and detailed mappingof artifact distributions during survey, providingan increasingly detailed settlement dataset for theIroco study area. The survey intensity employedin Iroco permitted the identification of both largeresidential sites and smaller camps (see Alden-derfer 2002). In addition, observations from theIroco survey suggest that some of the large resi-dential sites were not particularly tall mounds

and that some of the camps included especiallydense material accumulations. These results im-ply that some Formative period sites in La Joya,Río Kochi, and Belén might have been over-looked during survey, and also may explain whythe recorded sites (x = 2.72 m) are about 1.5 mtaller than the Iroco sites (x = 1.25 m).

McAndrews (2001) hypothesized thatWankarani “villages” fissioned before reachingthe carrying capacity of their individual catchmentareas and, consequently, that settlement densitieswere related to social stress, as opposed to eco-logical productivity. The catchment areas esti-mated by McAndrews were, however, derivedfrom archaeological agricultural village settle-ment systems from the Mantaro Valley in Peruand the central Valley of Mexico (i.e., Hastorf1993; Sanders et al. 1979), and not on more ap-propriate ecological requirements such as those ofAltiplano herding communities (see Vining 2011).Furthermore, Fox (2007) has tested McAndrews’smodel of Wankarani village fissioning and foundno evidence to suggest that a hypothesized mother(and larger) village of Chuquiña was older than ahypothesized daughter (and smaller) village ofPusno. Instead, Fox (2010) proposes a peer-com-munity system in which pastoralism constrained


Legend

Uppermost Level (N = 31)Upper Level (N = 92)Lower Level (N = 68)

Figure 8. Log size index of KCH21 camelid postcranial element measurements compared to the llama standard andsorted by occupation levels.

Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

population growth by requiring greater mobilityand larger catchment areas. In turn, higher mo-bility would have inhibited aspects associatedwith village life, such as reduced birth spacingand increased demands for agricultural labor (Fox2010:203). Although these propositions are plau-sible and testable, they rely on the settlement pat-tern postulated by McAndrews (1998, 2005a),which the Iroco results suggest is an artifact ofsurvey intensity.

The Iroco survey provides some interestinginsights into the Wankarani cultural complex set-tlement system. Based on the collected data, itseems unlikely that the Wankarani cultural com-plex settlement system corresponded to a villagesystem. Most of the previously identifiedWankarani “villages,” I argue, were actually res-idential bases, which, due to their specific loca-tion, tended to be reoccupied more frequentlythan other sites (see Bernbeck 2008). Perma-nently occupied villages with evidence of corpo-

rate architecture, cemeteries, plazas, and othersuch features were probably few, if not com-pletely absent. The fact that the majority of doc-umented sites are smaller than two hectares andpossibly occupied by as few as a single householdduring any given time further supports the infer-ence that multi-household settlements were ex-tremely uncommon. In effect, Bandy (2008), in arecent comparative study, used the Wankarani asan example of a society in which large villages(defined by the existence of 300 people occupy-ing an area of at least 3 ha) never developed. Fi-nally, the Wankarani settlement system stronglycontrasts with previous Archaic period hunter-gatherer modes of economic organization(Capriles et al. 2011). However, I hypothesizethat the apparent Neolithic demographic transitionin the Central Altiplano during the Formative pe-riod is an artifact of recurrent residential mobilityassociated with increased reliance on camelidpastoralism.


Figure 9. Comparison of Formative period settlement patterns from Iroco (this study) and Río Kochi, La Joya, and Belén(McAndrews 2005b).

Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

Wankarani Settlements as Pastoralist Residential Bases

Modern pastoralist residential bases are charac-terized by the presence of diverse structures andfeatures related to domestic, storage, and animalpenning activities (e.g., Delfino 2001; Kuznar1990, 1995; Nielsen 2000, 2001; Tomka 1994,2001; Yacobaccio and Madero 2001). Based onthese ethnoarchaeological expectations, I hy-pothesized that the layouts of the Wankarani sitesincluded features that were the locus of analogousactivities. Based on structure size and function,the identified features can be classified into threecomparable categories: domestic structures, stor-age features, and corrals.

Evidence from KCH21 suggests that domesticstructures were used for various purposes. Thepresence of multiple structures, including resi-dential habitation, as well as storage, is apparent.For instance, structures that included hearths ontheir interior were probably used for residentialactivities such as food processing and tool main-tenance. These structures also probably articu-lated broader residential space. There also seemsto be an association between shape, contents, andfunction. For instance, the structures associatedwith hearths from the Lower Level had more cir-cular shapes than those that were not associatedwith hearths. Furthermore, the structures that didnot have hearths had, on average, more pit fea-tures and comparatively more irregular shapes. Apossible interpretation for this pattern is that cir-cular structures with hearths were used as do-mestic residences, whereas the other structureswere mostly utilized for storage. In this sense, theFormative period settlements were not occupiedby various individual households, but possibly bysingle households that used several structures fordifferent purposes.

The complex layout of KCH21 also includeda number of other features, including interior andexterior pits, hearths, and outside activity areas.The pits were probably produced for a number ofreasons, as they show a great deal of variability insize, shape, and content. However, the most im-portant processes related to pit production wereprobably storage and trash disposal. Pits used forstorage contain caches of tools, including large ce-ramic storage jars with round bases, lithic hoes,

ground stone implements, and camelid bone tools.As part of the settlement use and in connectionwith abandonment processes, several of these pitswere transformed into disposal features. Some ofthese features included high densities of lithicflakes, camelid bones, and/or thousands of fishbones and scales (Capriles 2011).

Moreover, the construction, abandonment, andreconstruction dynamics associated with thesestructures suggest short-term (and probably sea-sonal) cycles of residential mobility. Indeed, atKCH21, most structures have a thick, often lam-inated, fill on top of the floors. These could be aconsequence of post-abandonment dumping ofsuccessive layers of trash, but they could also berelated to reoccupation events (see Schiffer et al.1987). Although people seem to have reoccupiedthe same building over and over again in a num-ber of cases, evidence from KCH21 suggests thatmultiple structures were abandoned and con-structed on a regular basis. Interestingly enough,recurrent reoccupation is a typical pattern ob-served in the stratigraphy of previously studiedWankarani sites.

Several ethnoarchaeologists have shown thatherding residential bases have multiple structuresand are frequently abandoned and reoccupied.Delfino (2001) has shown empirically that thesize of these compounds is not necessarily corre-lated with the number of people that inhabit them,but with the age of the head of household. Cyclesof residential bases are initiated with the estab-lishment of new nuclear families. Eventuallythese sites are abandoned, effectively completinga household life cycle. Because of the strategicecological and social location of these sites, itdoes not take long before a new household reoc-cupies the location, yet most of the infrastructureis entirely rebuilt. Comparable processes describethe occupation of pastures and seasonal camps.

Archaeologically, Wankarani sites are charac-terized by recurrent reoccupation, and the Irocodata suggest that some of the factors that couldhave favored occupation redundancy includedaccess to good pastures, benefiting from existinginfrastructure, and herd territoriality. The repeti-tion of this process for several generations wouldhave resulted in formation of deep, stratified, andrelatively dispersed mounds, along with remainsof residential and logistical camps scattered


Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

throughout the landscape. Furthermore, reoccu-pying the same locations over time, as well asburying their dead at these sites, could have con-stituted a strong symbolic referent for legitimiz-ing territoriality by constructing and reinforcingsocial memory (Hastorf 2003).

During the excavations at KCH21, the remainsof at least one large architectural feature, Structure1, were identified as exhibiting the attributes of aherding corral. Structure 1 is delimited by largeboulders of calcite, several of which had circularperforations that might have served for attachingpoles. The interior fill of the structure is mostlyclean of artifacts, but a few bones, ceramics, andlithics were recovered from its interior. Struc-tures of similar size, construction material, andlayout have been identified in Formative periodsites in the neighboring La Joya area. Rose(2001a, 2001b) exposed at least three of thesestructures in her excavations at La Barca, andFox (2007) documented a few partial circularwalls of structures larger than 5 m in diameter inhis deep excavation trenches at Pusno andChuquiña. In addition, Beaule (2002) documentedthe foundations of several large circular struc-tures in her site plan of the Tiwanaku period siteof Jachakala.

Rose (2001a:97–99) compared the three largefeatures she found in La Barca with Kuznar’s(1990) ethnoarchaeological expectations, but re-jected the possibility that these were corrals. Ac-cording to Rose (2001a:98), the La Barca featureswere too small (less than 68 m2), did not includedistinctive floors of compacted clay of blockystructure, were relatively clean of faunal remains,and were sometimes associated with human buri-als. The area outside these structures includeddense middens that contained high densities ofartifacts such as ceramic tubes and figurines,which led Rose (2001a) to believe that the struc-tures were used for ritual purposes. Nevertheless,I argue that the size, shape, and construction ma-terials fit with modern examples of corrals. Theuse of large boulders as foundations and even theattachment of poles to enlarge the structure arecommon throughout the Andes. The clean interioris also common because having artifacts aroundcould harm herding animals, especially juveniles.Furthermore, these structures were probably keptclean by recurrent collection of dung for fuel and

fertilizer. The fact that the structure floors of thecorrals at Iroco and La Barca were not composedof hard compact clay with blocky structure (assuggested by Kuznar 1990, 1995) is a consequenceof site formation processes characteristic of thestudy area, including the combined action of bio-logical activity, precipitation, and weathering.

All of this is not to say that ceremonial activi-ties did not take place in corrals— in fact, ethno-historic and ethnographic information suggeststhey are primary loci for ritual activities (Aber-crombie 1998; Bonavia 2008; Browman 1974;Flannery et al. 1989; Flores 1979; Kuznar 1995;Medinacelli 2003; Mengoni-Goñalons 2008;Nielsen 2001; Tomka 1994). For instance, corralsand patios are the places where animals aregrouped before ceremonies such as marking rites,when they are decorated with ear tassels. The spe-cific ceremonial meaning of corrals is also im-portant in Andean culture. Two words in Aymaradescribe corral, uyu and cachi (Medinacelli2003:22). The word cachi also associates themeaning of corral with enclosure and cemetery. In-terestingly enough, some burials attached to cor-rals in Iroco and La Barca have been documented.

Nevertheless, the primary role of corrals iseconomic. Corrals are used for protecting herdinganimals from predators during nights and as basesfor sleeping. Camelids are territorial, and havingspecific sleeping grounds is one of their behav-ioral traits (see Franklin 1983). In addition, cor-rals are used as locations for accumulating dung(used both for fuel and fertilizer). Medinacelli(2003:21), based on ethnohistoric information,also points out that corrals were used for group-ing and separating herds. Animals were oftenclassified into groups according to sex, age, color,and fiber quality. Sorting animals by these or anyother visible trait is one of the most commonforms of artificial selection. Corrals are also usedfor curing and separating sick animals. At a land-scape level, corrals are regularly used as territor-ial markers for separating herds, households, andeven communities. Corrals in this sense are in-strumental in the process of animal management,and their presence in Formative period sites pro-vides strong support for economic reliance oncamelid mobile pastoralism.

In addition, faunal evidence verified that llamaherding was the central subsistence activity, albeit


Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

complemented with a diverse meat diet, includinga range of small prey, which could have beenprocured opportunistically during logistical herd-ing trips. Wankarani herders could have opti-mized herd growth and use of derived productsand services with occasional hunting and gather-ing. A broad diet breadth is frequently related toresource stress but can also be the consequence ofopportunistic hunting during herding trips. Op-portunistic and even seasonally planned procure-ment of wild resources is a common practiceamong many ethnographically documented pas-toralist societies (Cribb 1991; Khazanov 1994).Moreover, camelid newborns are rarely present,and migratory birds such as flamingoes are fre-quent in the analyzed assemblages, which sug-gests that some of KCH21 was probably occupiedduring the dry season. Nevertheless, more re-search is required to fully explore the potential ofthese and other datasets (see Capriles 2011).

From a comparative perspective, the site struc-ture documented at Iroco (Figure 10) is similar tothat reported in other Formative period Wankaranicultural complex sites such as Huancarani,

Chuquiña, La Barca, Pusno, San Andrés, and UspaUspa (Bermann and Estévez 1995; Condarco et al.2002; Fox 2007; Rose 2001b; Ponce 1970; Walter1966; Wasson 1967). Each of these sites was prob-ably occupied by a single household at a time. In-deed, a recent comparative study using multidi-mensional scaling analysis of artifacts fromdomestic structures at Chuquiña and Pusno pro-duced small inter-household variation, stronglysuggesting very low levels of social differentiation(Drennan et al. 2010). These results might also berelated to residential mobility, as narrow assem-blage variation can be a consequence of recurringseasonally scheduled activities.

Wankarani sites also share some attributes withother Altiplano settlements such as Chullpa Playain Potosí (Lecoq 2001) and some sites in thePuripica and Tulán valleys of northern Chile(Núñez 2005), as these settlements seem to havebeen occupied by a few families that relied on an-imal herding. Tulán 54 is an exceptional case be-cause even though it is a mounded settlement, itsarchitectural and ritual features suggest complexceremonial behavior, albeit strongly related to


Figure 10. Artistic reconstruction of site KCH21 in Iroco. (Artwork by Alexandra Ramírez.)

Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

camelid pastoralism (Núñez et al. 2006). In con-trast, the well-preserved multi-room sites of Guat-acondo, Ramaditas, Tulor 1, and others located inthe Tarapacá and Atacama deserts are signifi-cantly larger and organizationally more complexthan most Wankarani sites (Ayala et al. 2008;Graffam et al. 1996; Núñez 2005; Núñez andSantoro 2011). This is also true about most For-mative period settlements from the southern LakeTiticaca basin, such as Chiripa, Kala Uyuni, andKhonko Wankane, where survey and excavationdata support the emergence of large villages oc-cupied by several families and complex ceremo-nial architecture during the Formative period(Bandy 2004; Hastorf 2008; Janusek 2008). Notsurprisingly, all of these sites are associated withstrong agricultural components during the For-mative period, and the southern Lake Titicacabasin witnessed primary state formation at theend of this time.

Conclusions: Wankarani Pastoralist Landscapes from a Comparative PerspectiveThe results of the archaeological survey and ex-cavations at Iroco suggest that the spatial config-uration of the Formative period Wankarani cul-tural complex resembles that of typical herdingcommunities around the world (Abdi 2003;Chang and Koster 1986; Cribb 1991; Frachetti2008; Wendrich and Barnard 2008). Intersite vari-ability in settlement patterns consisted of resi-dential bases complemented by temporarily oc-cupied logistical camps, and excavations at aresidential base revealed well-preserved evidenceof animal herding and residential mobility. Pas-toralist mobility and the creation of different kindsof sites are usually related to different micro-en-vironmental conditions (or resource patches). Be-cause of the longitudinal variation of the surveyarea (with Lake Uru-Uru to the west and a rangeof hills to the east), the documented distributionof sites seems to correlate well with the environ-mental distribution of aquatic environments, al-luvial plains, and hill slopes, with most residen-tial bases located in intermediate places such asfoothills. Consistent with the dynamism of pas-toralist settlement systems, it seems that the lo-cation and contents of these sites reflect the ac-cumulated remains of many generations of

various sizes, containing several superimposedherding occupations. The excavation of KCH21,where a minimum of three discrete levels withdifferent configurations were documented, con-firms the complexity of intrasite formationprocesses influenced by herding mobility. It is notsurprising that mobile pastoralism developed inthe Central Altiplano, as it has been proven to bean effective economic system to manage envi-ronmental and social risk.

To recognize that Wankarani settlements wereoccupied by mobile pastoralists is significant fora number of reasons. First, it helps to make senseof the archaeological record of a society that waspreviously seen as anomalous but is actually char-acterized by different processes of organizationaland institutional complexity. Secondly, it facili-tates framing the variability associated with theseoccupations not in terms of truncated develop-ment, but as dynamic adaptations to fluctuatingenvironmental and social constraints. Thirdly, itallows us to ask general comparative questionsabout specific trajectories and processes associ-ated with early pastoralist societies in the Andesand around the world.

From this new perspective, there are many di-rections for future research, including addressingsignificant questions about the origins of pas-toralism in the Central Altiplano (Capriles and Albarracín-Jordán 2013) and the subsequent in-tegration of camelid herders into the Tiwanakupolitical economy. For instance, was mobilityused as a resource to enhance or limit the controlof the expanding state? Preliminary research fromIroco and other Central Altiplano settlements sug-gests that Altiplano pastoralists expanded the roleof mobility to facilitate and even control interre-gional exchange through the establishment oftraffic nodes (Bermann and Estévez 1993; Brow-man 1981; Michel 2008; Núñez and Dillehay1995; Núñez and Nielsen 2011). But how thisprocess took place and what tradeoffs were in-volved remain open questions.

Finally, the currently accepted interpretation ofthe Formative period Wankarani cultural com-plex as made up of permanent villages is artificial.The present state of knowledge regarding the Al-tiplano Formative period is biased by a failure toutilize adequate relational analogies and appro-priate archaeological correlates for understanding


Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

herding landscapes and their evolution throughtime (Frachetti 2012). Disregarding the signifi-cance of mobile pastoralists and emphasizing therole of agriculture in the interpretation of the Al-tiplano people’s past, archaeologists have createda narrative that has proven intellectually unpro-ductive for improving our understanding of thesesocieties. Kevin Lane (2010) and Tom Dillehay(2011) have identified and labeled this researchbias as “agrocentrism.” Moving beyond thisstandpoint, the by-products of the Wankarani’spresence are materialized not as large tumuli com-posed of collapsed villages of fully sedentaryagriculturalists, but as cyclically occupied andabandoned compounds, dispersed herding camps,intermittently revisited seasonal pastures, and re-dundantly trampled pathways, still calling for fur-ther research.Acknowledgments: This research project was supported by aNational Science Foundation Doctoral Dissertation Improve-ment Grant (BCS# 0737793), Lambda Alpha, the GraduateSchool of Arts and Sciences of Washington University in St.Louis, the Center for Comparative Archaeology at the Uni-versity of Pittsburgh, and reduced fees from the University ofArizona-NSF AMS Facility. Fieldwork in Iroco was facilitatedby the Unidad Nacional de Arqueología de Bolivia, Inti RaymiMining Company, Factumx Ingenería, Universidad Técnica deOruro, and the people of the communities of Iroco, Cochiraya,and Chuzequeri. I wish to express my gratitude to Juan Albarr -acín-Jordán, David Browman, Fiona Marshall, ElizabethArkush, and especially Marc Bermann for their support andcomments on an earlier version of this paper. The editors andthree anonymous reviewers also provided sound suggestionsfor improving this article. I am indebted to Sergio Calla Mal-donado, Alejandro Barrientos, and Juan Carlos Segurola fortheir outstanding help during fieldwork. I must also thankMark Aldenderfer, Dante Angelo, Matthew Bandy, LoukasBarton, Maria Bruno, Alejandra Domic, Robert Drennan,Michael Frachetti, Gayle Fritz, Steven Goldstein, Bryan Hanks,Christine Hastorf, T.R. Kidder, BrieAnna Langlie, Amanda Lo-gan, Eduardo Machicado, Blaine Maley, Velia Mendoza, Mar-cos Michel, Melanie Miller, Katherine Moore, Axel Nielsen,Darwin Palomino, Andrew Roddick, Calogero Santoro, andNicholas Tripcevich for sharing conversations about the de-velopment of pastoralism in the Andes and contributing sub-stantially to thoughts and ideas discussed in this paper.

Data Availability Statement. This article is based on data pub-lished as part of the author’s doctoral dissertation, which isavailable online for free: http://openscholarship.wustl.edu/etd/557/

In addition, detailed survey, excavation, and analysis re-sults are available in the Project reports submitted physicallyand digitally to the Bolivian Viceministerio de Intercultural-idad. The author is happy to facilitate copies of this materialand further information upon request.

References CitedAbdi, Kamyar

2003 The Early Development of Pastoralism in the CentralZagros Mountains. Journal of World Prehistory17(4):395–448.

Abercrombie, Thomas A.1998 Pathways of Memory and Power: Ethnography andHistory among Andean People. University of WisconsinPress, Madison.

Albarracin-Jordan, Juan2005 Empresa minera Inti Raymi, Proyecto Kori Chaca: es-

tudio de evaluación de impacto arqueológico (EEIAR). Fi-nal report submitted to the National Unit of Archaeologyof Bolivia, La Paz.

2007 La formación del estado prehispánico en los Andes:origen y desarrollo de la sociedad segmentaria indígena.Fundación Bartolomé de las Casas, La Paz. Copies avail-able from Bolivian Viceministerio de Interculturalidad.

Aldenderfer, Mark S.2001 Andean Pastoral Origins and Evolution: The Role of

Ethnoarchaeology. In Ethnoarchaeology of South Ameri-ca: Contributions to Archaeological Method and Theory,edited by Lawrence A. Kuznar, pp. 19–30. Ethnoarchae-ological Series 4, International Monographs in Prehistory,Ann Arbor.

2002 Explaining Changes in Settlement Dynamics acrossTransformations of Modes of Production: From Huntingto Herding in the South-Central Andes. In Beyond Foragingand Collecting: Evolutionary Change in Hunter-Gather-er Settlement Systems, edited by Ben Fitzhugh and JunkoHabu, pp. 387–412. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers,New York.

Ayala Rocabado, Patricia, Carlos Carrasco, and Mauricio UribeRodríguez

2008 Alfarería y líticos wankarani: caracterización y vínculoscon el Norte Grande de Chile. In Arqueología de las tier-ras altas, valles interandinos y tierras bajas de Bolivia.Memorias del I Congreso de Arqueología de Bolivia, edit-ed by Claudia Rivera Casanovas, pp. 99–-114. Universi-dad Mayor de San Andrés, Programa de Investigación Es-tratégica en Bolivia, La Paz.

Bandy, Matthew S.2004 Trade and Social Power in the Southern Titicaca Basin

Formative. Archeological Papers of the American An-thropological Association 14(1):91–111.

2005 New World Settlement Evidence for a Two-Stage Ne-olithic Demographic Transition. Current Anthropology46(S):S109–S115.

2008 Global Patterns of Early Village Development. In TheNeolithic Demographic Transition and Its Consequences,edited by Jean-Pierre Bocquet-Appel and Ofer Bar-Yosef,pp. 333–357. Springer, New York.

Bandy, Matthew S., and Jake R. Fox2010 Becoming Villagers: The Evolution of Early Village

Societies. In Becoming Villagers: Comparing Early VillageSocieties, edited by Matthew S. Bandy and Jake R. Fox,pp. 1–16. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Beaule, Christine D.2002 Late Intermediate Period Political Economy and

Household Organization at Jachakala, Bolivia. UnpublishedPh.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Univer-sity of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh.

Bellwood, Peter, and Marc Oxenham2008 The Expansion of Farming Societies and the Role of

the Neolithic Demographic Transition. In The Neolithic De-mographic Transition and Its Consequences, edited by Jean-


Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

Pierre Bocquet-Appel and Ofer Bar-Yosef, pp. 13–34.Springer, New York.

Bermann, Marc, and José Estévez Castillo1993 Jachakala: A New Archaeological Complex of the De-

partment of Oruro, Bolivia. Annals of the Carnegie Museum62(4):311–340.

1995 Domestic Artifact Assemblages and Ritual Activitiesin the Bolivian Formative. Journal of Field Archaeology22(4):389–398.

Bernbeck, Robert2008 An Archaeology of Multisited Communities. In TheArchaeology of Mobility: Old World and New World No-madism, edited by Hans Barnard and Willeke Wendrich,pp. 43–77. Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University ofCalifornia, Los Angeles.

Binford, Lewis R.1980 Willow Smoke and Dogs’ Tails: Hunter-Gatherer Set-

tlement Systems and Archaeological Site FormationProcesses. American Antiquity 45(1):4–17.

Bocquet-Appel, Jean-Pierre2002 Paleoanthropological Traces of a Neolithic Demo-

graphic Transition. Current Anthropology 43(4):637–650.Bonavia, Duccio

2008 South American Camelids. Cotsen Institute of Ar-chaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Browman, David L.1974 Pastoralism Nomadism in the Andes. Current An-thropology 15(2):188–196.

1981 New Light on Andean Tiwanaku. American Scientist69(4):408–419.

1987 Agro-Pastoral Risk Management in the Central Andes.Research in Economic Anthropology 8:171–200.

1997 Pastoral Risk Perception and Risk Definition for An-dean Herders. Nomadic Peoples 1(1):22–36.

2008 Pastoral Nomadism in the Central Andes: A HistoricRetrospective Example. In The Archaeology of Mobility:Old World and New World Nomadism, edited by HansBarnard and Willeke Wendrich, pp. 160–173. Cotsen In-stitute of Archaeology, University of California, Los An-geles.

Bruhns, Karen Olsen1994 Ancient South America. Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge.Capriles, José M.

2008 Proyecto arqueológico en Iroco, Temporada 2007. Informede avance de investigación. Report submitted to the UnidadNacional de Arqueología de Bolivia, La Paz. Copies avail-able from Bolivian Viceministerio de Interculturalidad.

2011 The Economic Organization of Early Camelid Pas-toralism in the Andean Highlands of Bolivia. UnpublishedPh.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Wash-ington University in St. Louis, St. Louis.

Capriles, José M., and Juan Albarracin-Jordan2013 The Earliest Human Occupations in Bolivia: A Review

of the Archaeological Evidence. Quaternary Internation-al 301:46–59.

Capriles, José M., Sergio Calla Maldonado, and Juan Albarracin-Jordan

2011 Tecnología lítica y estrategias de subsistencia durantelos períodos Arcaico y Formativo en el altiplano central,Bolivia. Chungara, Revista de Antropología Chilena43:455–468.

Caracotche, María Soledad2001 The Invisibility of Time: An Ethnoarchaeological Study

of the Temporary Sites of Herders of the Southern Puna.In Ethnoarchaeology of Andean South America: Contri-butions to Archaeological Method and Theory, edited by

Lawrence A. Kuznar, pp. 97–115. Ethnoarchaeological Se-ries 4, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor.

Cardozo, Armando1981 Proyecciones de la ganadería de ovinos y camélidosen el Departamento de Oruro. Academia Nacional de Cien-cias de Bolivia, La Paz.

Chang, Claudia2006 A Tribute to Susan Kent’s Ethnoarchaeological Stud-

ies on Mobility: Ethnoarchaeological and ArchaeologicalStudies of Pastoral Nomads in Greece and Kazakhstan. Ar-chaeological Papers of the American Anthropological As-sociation 16:27–36.

Chang, Claudia, and Harold A. Koster1986 Beyond Bones: Toward an Archaeology of Pastoral-

ism. In Advances in Archaeology Method and Theory, Vol.9, edited by Michael B. Schiffer, pp. 97–148. AcademicPress, New York.

Childe, V. Gordon1951 Social Evolution. Watts, London.

Condarco Castellón, Carola, Edgar Huarachi Mamani, and MileVargas Rosquellas

2002 Tras las huellas del tambo real de Paria. Programa deInvestigación Estratégica en Bolivia, La Paz.

Cribb, Roger1991 Nomads in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge.Cuenca Sempertegui, Ángela, Eva Garnica Bahoz, Elizabeth

López Canelas, and Isabel Marca Cáceres

2005 Más allá de las pajas y espinas: biodiversidad en elmunicipio de Oruro (Comunidades Cochiraya – Iroco –Chuzekery). Centro de Ecología y Pueblos Andinos, Lati-nas Editores, Oruro.

Dedenbach-Salazar Sáenz, Sabine1990 Inka pachaq llamanpa willaynin: uso y crianza de loscamélidos en la época incaica. Estudio lingüístico y et-nohistórico basado en las fuentes lexicográficas y textu-rales del primer siglo después de la conquista. BonnerAmerikanistische Studien, Seminar für Volkerkunde, Uni-versität Bonn, Bonn.

Delfino, Daniel D.2001 Of Pircas and the Limits of Society: Ethnoarchaeol-

ogy in the Puna, Laguna Blanca, Catamarca, Argentina. InEthnoarchaeology of Andean South America: Contributionsto Archaeological Method and Theory, edited by LawrenceA. Kuznar, pp. 116–137. Ethnoarchaeological Series 4, In-ternational Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor.

Dillehay, Tom2011 Direcciones futuras para la arqueología del pastoreo

y el tráfico caravanero sur andino. In En ruta: arqueología,historia y etnografía del tráfico sur andino, edited by Lau-taro Núñez and Axel E. Nielsen, pp. 399–405. EncuentroGrupo Editor, Córdoba.

Dransart, Penelope Z.2002 Earth, Water, Fleece, and Fabric: An Ethnography andArchaeology of Andean Camelid Herding. Routledge, Lon-don.

Drennan, Robert D., Christian E. Peterson, and Jake R. Fox2010 Degrees and Kinds of Inequalities. In Pathways to Pow-er: New Perspectives on the Emergence of Social Inequality,edited by T. Douglas Price and Gary M. Feinman, pp. 45–76.Springer, New York.

Dyson-Hudson, Rada, and Neville Dyson-Hudson1980 Nomadic Pastoralism. Annual Review of Anthropol-ogy 9:15–61.

Flannery, Kent V.1972 The Origin of the Village as a Settlement Type in


Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

Mesoamerica and the Near East: A Comparative Study. InMan, Settlement and Urbanism, edited by Peter J. Ucko,Ruth Tringham and G. W. Dimbleby, pp. 23–53. SchenkmanPublishing Company, Cambridge.

2002 The Origins of the Village Revisited: From Nuclear toExtended Households. American Antiquity 67(3):417–433.

Flannery, Kent V., Joyce Marcus, and Robert G. Reynolds1989 The Flocks of the Wamani: A Study of Llama Herderson the Punas of Ayacucho, Peru. Academic Press, San Diego.

Flores Ochoa, Jorge1979 Pastoralists of the Andes: The Alpaca Herders ofParatía. Translated by Ralph Bolton. Institute of theStudy of Human Issues, Philadelphia.

Fox, Jake R.2007 Time and Process in an Early Village Settlement Sys-

tem on the Bolivian Southern Altiplano. Unpublished Ph.D.dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University ofPittsburgh, Pittsburgh.

2010 A Persistent Early Village Settlement System on theBolivian Southern Altiplano. In Becoming Villagers:Comparing Early Village Societies, edited by Matthew S.Bandy and Jake R. Fox, pp. 184–204. University of Ari-zona Press, Tucson.

Frachetti, Michael D.2008 Pastoralist Landscapes and Social Interaction inBronze Age Eurasia. University of California Press,Berkeley.

2012 Multiregional Emergence of Mobile Pastoralism andNonuniform Institutional Complexity across Eurasia. Cur-rent Anthropology 53(1):2–38.

Franklin, William L.1983 Contrasting Socioecologies of South America’s Wild

Camelids: The Vicuña and the Guanaco. In Advances in theStudy of Mammalian Behavior, edited by John F. Eisenbergand Devra G. Kleiman, pp. 573–629. Special Publication7. American Society of Mammalogists, Shippensburg.

Gifford-Gonzales, Diane2005 Pastoralism and Its Consequences. In African Ar-chaeology: A Critical Introduction, edited by Anne B. Stahl,pp. 187–224. Blackwell, Malden.

Graffam, Gray, Mario Rivera, and Alvaro Carevic1996 Ancient Metallurgy in the Atacama: Evidence for Cop-

per Smelting during Chile’s Early Ceramic Period. LatinAmerican Antiquity 7(2):101–113.

Hastorf, Christine A.1993 Agriculture and the Onset of Political Inequality be-fore the Inka. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

2003 Community with the Ancestors: Ceremonies and So-cial Memory in the Middle Formative at Chiripa, Bolivia.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 22(4):305–322.

2008 The Formative Period in the Titicaca Basin. In Hand-book of South American Archaeology, edited by HelaineSilverman and William H. Isbell, pp. 545–561. Springer,New York.

Ingold, Tim1980 Hunters, Pastoralists and Ranches: ReindeerEconomies and their Transformations. Cambridge Uni-versity Press, Cambridge.

Janusek, John Wayne2004 Tiwanaku and Its Precursors: Recent Research and

Emerging Perspectives. Journal of Archaeological Research12(2):121–183.

2008 Ancient Tiwanaku. Cambridge University Press, Cam-bridge.

Kent, Jonathan1982 The Domestication and Exploitation of the South Amer-

ican Camelids: Methods of Analysis and Their Application

to Circum-Lacustrine Archaeological Sites in Bolivia andPeru. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of An-thropology, Washington University in St. Louis.

Khazanov, Anatoly M.1994 Nomads and the Outside World. Translated by Julia

Crookenden. 2nd ed. University of Wisconsin Press,Madison.

Kolata, Alan L.1993 Tiwanaku: Portrait of an Andean Civilization. Black-

well, Cambridge.2003 The Social Production of Tiwanaku: Political Econ-

omy and Authority in a Native Andean State. In Tiwanakuand Its Hinterland: Archaeology and Paleoecology of anAndean Civilization, Vol. 2. Urban and Rural Archaeolo-gy, edited by Alan L. Kolata, pp. 449–472. Smithsonian In-stitution Press, Washington, D.C.

Kuznar, Lawrence A.1990 Economic Models, Ethnoarchaeology, and Early

Herding in the High Sierra of the South Central Andes. Un-published Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropolo-gy, Northwestern University, Evanston.

1995 Awatimarka: The Ethnoarchaeology of an AndeanHerding Community. Harcourt Brace College Publishers,Fort Worth.

2001 Introduction to Andean Ethnoarchaeology. In Eth-noarchaeology of Andean South America: Contributionsto Archaeological Method and Theory, edited by LawrenceA. Kuznar, pp. 1–18. Ethnoarchaeological Series 4, Inter-national Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor.

Lane, Kevin2009 Engineered Highlands: The Social Organization of Wa-

ter in the Ancient North-Central Andes (AD 1000–1480).World Archaeology 41(1):169–190.

2010 ¿Hacia dónde se dirigen los pastores? Un análisis delpapel del agropastoralismo en la difusión de las lenguas enlos Andes. Boletín de Arqueología PUCP 14:181–198.

Lecoq, Patrice2001 El Período Formativo en Potosí: un estado de la

cuestión. Textos Antropológicos 13(1–2):231–263.López García, Maura K.

2003 Pastoreo andino (Llanquera - Carangas). Centro deEcología y Pueblos Andinos, Latinas Editores, Oruro.

McAndrews, Timothy L.1998 Early Village-Based Society and Long-Term Cultur-

al Evolution in the South-Central Andean Altiplano. Un-published Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropolo-gy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh.

2001 Organización y crecimiento de los sistemas de asen-tamiento temprano basados en aldeas en el altiplanoAndino sur central. Textos Antropológicos 13(1–2):135–145.

2005a Wankarani Settlement Systems in Evolutionary Per-spective: A Study in Early Village-Based Society and Long-Term Cultural Evolution in the South-Central Andean Al-tiplano. Los sistemas de asentamiento wankarani desde unaperspectiva evolutiva: estudio de una sociedad tempranabasada en la aldea y su evolución cultural en el sur del al-tiplano central andino. Translated by Ana María Boada Ri-vas. University of Pittsburgh Memoirs in Latin AmericanArchaeology No. 15. Plural Editores, Pittsburgh.

2005b Wankarani Settlement Dataset. University of Pitts-burgh, Comparative Archaeology Database. Electronic re-source, http://www.cadb.pitt.edu, accessed August 20,2012.

McCormac, F. Gerry, Alan G. Hogg, Paul G. Blackwell, CaitlinE. Buck, Thomas F. G. Higham, and Paula J. Reimer

2004 SHCal04 Southern Hemisphere Calibration, 0–11.0 calkyr BP. Radiocarbon 46(3):1087–1092.


Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

Marshall, Fiona, Katherine Grillo, and Lee Arco2011 Prehistoric Pastoralists and Social Responses to Cli-

matic Risk in East Africa. In Sustainable Lifeways: Cul-tural Persistence in an Ever-Changing Environment, edit-ed by Naomi F. Miller, Katherine M. Moore, and KathlynRyan, pp. 39–74. University of Pennsylvania Museum ofArchaeology and Anthropology, Philadelphia.

Meadow, Richard H.1999 The Use of Size Index Scaling Techniques for Research

on Archaeozoological Collections from the Middle East.In Historia Animalium ex Ossibus. Festschrift für Angelavon den Driesch, edited by Cornelia Becker, Henriette Man-hart, Joris Peters, and Jörg Schibler, pp. 285–300. VerlagMarie Leidorf, Rahden.

Medinacelli, Ximena2003 La cultura de los llameros a través del Diccionario de

Bertonio. Historia y Cultura 28–29:11–38.2010 Sariri. Los llameros y la construcción de la sociedadcolonial. Travaux de l’Institute Français d’Étutes Andines286. Instituto Francés de Estudios Andinos, Plural Editores,La Paz.

Mengoni-Goñalons, Guillermo L.2008 Camelids in Ancient Andean Societies: A Review of

the Zooarchaeological Evidence. Quaternary Interna-tional 185(1):59–68.

Mengoni-Goñalons, Guillermo L., and Hugo Yacobaccio2006 The Domestication of South American Camelids. A

View from the South-Central Andes. In Documenting Do-mestication: New Genetic and Archaeological Paradigms,edited by Melinda A. Zeder, Daniel G. Bradley, Eve Emsh-willer, and Bruce D. Smith, pp. 228–244. University of Cal-ifornia Press, Berkeley.

Michel López, Marcos R.2008 Patrones de asentamiento precolombino del Alti-

plano Boliviano: lugares centrales de la región de Quilla-cas, Departamento de Oruro, Bolivia.Unpublished Ph.D.dissertation, Uppsala University, Uppsala.

Moseley, Michael E.2001 The Incas and Their Ancestors: The Archaeology ofPeru. 2nd ed. Thames & Hudson, New York.

Nielsen, Axel E.2000 Andean Caravans: An Ethnoarchaeology. Unpub-

lished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Uni-versity of Arizona, Tucson.

2001 Ethnoarchaeological Perspectives on Caravan Tradein the South Central Andes. In Ethnoarchaeology of AndeanSouth America. Contributions to Archaeological Methodand Theory, edited by Lawrence A. Kuznar, pp. 163–201.Ethnoarchaeological Series 4, International Monographsin Prehistory, Ann Arbor.

2009 Pastoralism and the Non-Pastoral World in the Late Pre-Columbian History of the Southern Andes (1000–1535).Nomadic Peoples 13(2):17–35.

Núñez, Lautaro2005 La naturaleza de la expansión aldeana durante el For-

mativo Tardío en la Cuenca de Atacama. Chungara, Re-vista Chilena de Antropología 37(2):165–193.

Núñez, Lautaro, Isabel Cartajena, Carlos Carrasco, and Patriciode Souza

2006 El templete de Tulán de la Puna de Atacama: emer-gencia de complejidad ritual durante el Formativo Temprano(norte de Chile). Latin American Antiquity 17(4):445–473.

Núñez, Lautaro, and Tom D. Dillehay1995 Movilidad giratoria, armonía social y desarrollo enlos Andes Meridionales: patrones de tráfico e interac-ción económica (ensayo). Universidad del Norte,Antofagasta.

Núñez, Lautaro, and Axel E. Nielsen2011 Caminante, sí hay camino: reflexiones sobre el tráfi-

co sur andino. In En ruta: arqueología, historia y etnografíadel tráfico sur andino, edited by Lautaro Núñez and AxelE. Nielsen, pp. 11–41. Encuentro Grupo Editor, Córdoba.

Núñez, Lautaro, and Calogero M. Santoro2011 El tránsito Arcaico-Formativo en la circumpuna y valles

occidentales del centro sur Andino: hacia los caminos “Ne-olíticos”. Chungara, Revista de Antropología Chilena43:487–530.

Orlove, Benjamin S.1977 Alpacas, Sheep, and Men: The Wool Export Econo-my and Regional Society of Southern Peru. Academic Press,New York.

Ponce Sanginés, Carlos1970 Las culturas Wankarani y Chiripa y su relación conTiwanaku. Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bolivia, LaPaz.

1972 Tiwanaku: espacio, tiempo y cultura. Ensayo de sín-tesis arqueológica. Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bo-livia, La Paz.

1980 Panorama de la arqueología boliviana. Editorial Ju-ventud, La Paz.

Reitz, Elizabeth J., and Elizabeth S. Wing2008 Zooarchaeology. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge.Rigsby, Catherine A., J. Platt Bradbury, Paul A. Baker, Stephanie

M. Rollins, and Michelle R. Warren2005 Late Quaternary Palaeolakes, Rivers, and Wetlands on

the Bolivian Altiplano and Their Palaeoclimatic Implica-tions. Journal of Quaternary Science 20(7–8):671–691.

Rose, Courtney E.2001a Household and Community Organization of a For-

mative Period, Bolivian Settlement. Unpublished Ph.D. dis-sertation, Department of Anthropology, University ofPittsburgh, Pittsburgh.

2001b Organización residencial en una aldea del período For-mativo Temprano: el sitio Wankarani de La Barca, Oruro.Textos Antropológicos 13(1–2):147–165.

Salzman, Philip Carl2004 Pastoralists: Equality, Hierarchy, and the State.

Westview Press, Boulder.Sanders, William T., Jeffrey R. Parsons, and Robert S. Stanley

1979 The Basin of Mexico: Ecological Processes in the Evo-lution of a Civilization. Academic Press, New York.

Schiffer, Michael B., Ana M. Baron, Paulina P. Cortes, and JavierT. Sepulveda

1987 Deterioration of Adobe Structures: A Case Study fromSan Pedro de Atacama, Northern Chile. In Natural For-mation Processes and the Archaeological Record, editedby David T. Nash and Michael D. Petraglia, pp. 10–29. BARInternational Series 352. British Archaeological Reports,Oxford.

Stanish, Charles2003 Ancient Titicaca. The Evolution of Complex Society inSouthern Peru and Northern Bolivia. University of Cali-fornia Press, Berkeley.

Stuiver, Minze, and Paula J. Reimer1993 Extended 14C database and Revised CALIB 3.0 14C Cal-

ibration Program. Radiocarbon 35(1):215–230. Tomka, Steve A.

1993 Site Abandonment Behavior among TranshumantAgro-Pastoralists: The Effect of Delayed Curation on As-semblage Composition. In Abandonment of Settlement andRegions: Ethnoarchaeological and Archaeological Ap-proaches, edited by Catherine M. Cameron and Steve A.Tomka, pp. 11–24. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.


Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

1994 Quinua and Camelids on the Bolivian Altiplano: AnEthnoarchaeological Approach to Agro-Pastoral SubsistenceProduction with Emphasis on Agro-Pastoral Transhu-mance. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of An-thropology, University of Texas, Austin.

2001 “Up and Down we Move...”: Factors ConditioningAgro-Pastoral Settlement Organization in Mountainous Set-tings. In Ethnoarchaeology of Andean South America: Con-tributions to Archaeological Method and Theory, edited byLawrence A. Kuznar, pp. 138–162. Ethnoarchaeological Se-ries 4, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor.

Tripcevich, Nicholas2007 Quarries, Caravans, and Routes to Complexity: Pre-

hispanic Obsidian in the South-Central Andes. UnpublishedPh.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Univer-sity of California, Santa Barbara.

Vining, Benjamin R.2011 Ruralism, Land Use History, and Holocene Climate in

the Suches Highlands, Southern Peru. Unpublished Ph.D.dissertation, Department of Archaeology, Boston Univer-sity, Boston.

Wachtel, Nathan2001 El regreso de los antepasados: los indios urus de Bo-livia, del siglo XX al XVI. Ensayo de historia regresiva.Translated by Laura Ciezar. Fondo de Cultura Económi-ca, México, D.F.

Walter, Heinz1966 Beiträge zur Archäologie Boliviens. Die Grabungendes Museums für Völkerkunde Berlin im Jahre 1958.Archäologische Studien in Kordilleren Boliviens II. Ver-lag von Dietrich Reimer, Berlin.

Wasson, John1967 Investigaciones preliminares en los “mounds” de

Oruro. Khana 38:145–156.

Wendrich, Willeke, and Hans Barnard2008 The Archaeology of Mobility: Definitions and Research

Approaches. In The Archaeology of Mobility: Old Worldand New World Nomadism, edited by Hans Barnard andWilleke Wendrich, pp. 1–21. Cotsen Institute of Archae-ology, University of California, Los Angeles.

Wheeler, Jane C.1995 Evolution and Present Situation of the South Ameri-

can Camelidae. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society54:271–295.

Wylie, Alison2002 Thinking from Things: Essays in the Philosophy of Ar-chaeology. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Yacobaccio, Hugo D., and Cecilia M. Madero2001 Ethnoarchaeology of a Pastoral Settlement of the An-

dean Plateau: an Investigation of Archaeological Scale. InEthnoarchaeology of Andean South America: Contributionsto Archaeological Method and Theory, edited by LawrenceA. Kuznar, pp. 84–96. Ethnoarchaeological Series 4, In-ternational Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor.

Note1. Although the concept of agriculture incorporates both

plant and animal domesticates, for the sake of simplicity, in thispaper, I use the term agriculture to refer to the cultivation or farm-ing of domesticated plants, except where I indicate otherwise.

Submitted October 12, 2012; Revised July 24, 2013;Accepted January 17, 2014.

26 LATIN AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 25, No. 1, 2014]

Del

iver

ed b

y ht

tp://

saa.

met

apre

ss.c

om

Jose

Cap

rile

s (4

18-7

6-64

2)

IP A

ddre

ss: 1

90.1

64.2

55.6

8

Tue

sday

, Apr

il 01

, 201

4 2:

31:3

1 PM

Mobile Communities and Pastoralist Landscapes during the Formative Period in the Central Altiplano...

Documents

Transcript of Mobile Communities and Pastoralist Landscapes during the Formative Period in the Central Altiplano...