Did The Inka Copy Cusco? An Answer Derived From an Architectural-Sculptural Model

transcript

164 JLACA 12 . 1

Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Anthropology,Vol.12,No.1,pp.164–199. ISSN 1935-4932,online ISSN 1925-4940.

photocopy or reproduce article content through the University of California Press’s Rights and Permissions website,

http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintinfo/asp. DOI: 10.1525/jlaca.2007.12.1.164

Did The Inka Copy Cusco? An Answer Derived From an Architectural-Sculptural Model

Jessica Joyce Christieeast carolina universit y

r e s u m e nEste artículo examina el diseño arquitectónico esculpido compuesto por una kallanka,

una piedra labrada/enfatizada y una plaza en varios asentamientos Inka, y analiza como

este diseño materializaba aspectos de la ideología del estado Inka. Una kallanka es una

larga y publica estructura rectangular con numerosas puertas abriendo sobre una plaza.

La plaza exhibe una piedra especial que podía quedarse tal cual, sin modificación, o al

contrario presentarse tallada en un asiento. En la mayoría de los casos, la roca enfatizada

era parte del concepto complejo del usnu que muchas veces tenía la forma física de una

plataforma arquitectónica. Usnus podían ser asientos de un gobernante o asientos

del Sol. La coincidencia filosófica entre la piedra y el usnu evoca varias asociaciones

simbólicas. Este diseño existía en Cusco y también en diversas haciendas reales y ciu-

dades elegidas en las fronteras del imperio Inka. Además las rocas enfatizadas eran rela-

cionadas a espacios neutrales y a centros sagrados. Esto demuestra que gobernantes Inka

usaron el diseño de manera personal para legitimar su autoridad política.

palabras claves: Inka, Andes, Arqueología, Arquitectura, Cusco. keywords: Inka,

Andes, Archaeology, Architecture, Cusco.

In this essay, I discuss the possible political meanings of an architecturalsculptural pattern found at many Inka settlements. It was developed in Cusco butwas used in many parts of the empire to publicize Inka state ideology. This pat-tern consists of a plaza, a kallanka or kallanka-like buildings, and a carved oruncarved foregrounded rock. A kallanka is a long rectangular hall with numerousdoors opening onto a plaza. The plaza exhibits a large rock or boulder which had

Did the Inka Copy Cusco? 165

particular symbolic significance in state ritual, and could be slightly modified toelaborately sculpted.

The essay presents three major arguments: The first is that the Inka used thearchitectural pattern of a plaza, a kallanka, and a foregrounded rock (in the textoften referred to as “the pattern”) deliberately and selectively to establish links withthe capital. Such connections with Cusco were constructed at many royal estatesand outlying border towns, which were marked in that way as neutral spaces andcenters where the Inka state was symbolically present. The second claim I make inorder to contribute to a better archaeological understanding of Inka sculpted rocksis that some carved rock, wak’as (carved rock shrines), functioned as usnus (usnuswere masonry platforms or stones and functioned as seats; they will be defined inmore depth below). Thirdly, I argue that individual emperors used the patternselectively and sometimes also modified it, especially the usnu/rock, according totheir own likings.

The Physical and Ethnographic Evidence: The Pattern at Cusco, the Capital

The archetypal example of the pattern in focus existed in the center of Cusco itself.I try to describe it below using colonial chronicles and secondary sources. There isno absolute certainty of what Inka Cusco looked like. The city was burnt by the Inkathemselves when they attempted to reconquer their capital from Spanish occupa-tion in 1535. The Spanish residents rebuilt Cusco as a Spanish colonial city (Rowe1990). Thus, only eyewitnesses who saw the capital before 1535 constitute reliablesources of what Inka Cusco looked like. To reconstruct Inka Cusco, John Rowe(1967) uses five such eyewitness accounts, records of the distribution of house lotsto Spanish settlers in 1534, as well as some archaeological data. The main plaza hadtwo sectors, Awkaypata and Kusipata, which were separated by the Huatanay orSaphy River. I use the term “plaza” to mean an open space where people gathered inthe context of an Inka settlement. Depending upon the type of settlement and itssurrounding geography, plazas could be large open spaces, as in the capital, or moreintimate courtyards, as in some royal estates. Victor Angles Vargas (1988:79–88) dis-cusses the names and spellings of the two sections of the main plaza in Cusco. TheSpanish writers spelled Awkaypata and Kusipata in a number of different ways dueto their lack of understanding and interest in the Quechua language. The two namestranslate as “place of crying” (Awkaypata) and “place of rejoicing” (Kusipata)(Angles Vargas 1988:81–82; see also Cornejo Bouroncle 1946). Angles Vargas relatesthe names to Inka ritual practices. Many ceremonies began with ritual crying andgrieving in the northeastern or Awkaypata sector and ended with a celebration,dancing, and feasting in the southwestern or Kusipata sector thus setting up a cleardichotomy between names and functions of both sectors.

The feature of greatest interest in this essay is the foregrounded rock (its Cuscoversion was the usnu). Nobody knows exactly what the usnu looked like or wherein the main plaza it stood because the descriptions by the chroniclers are not con-sistent (see, for instance, D’Altroy 2002:115, 329; Bauer and Dearborn 1995:36). TomZuidema (1980) argues that there were two usnus used for solar observations in InkaCusco. The concept of the usnu was extremely complex and some carved rocksshared some of its aspects. Due to this complexity, I discuss the Cusco usnu and itsrelevance for interpreting modified rocks in the second section of this essay.

The third feature of the pattern is the kallanka. Awkaypata was lined by severalkallankas (see Bauer 2004:111–135; D’Altroy 2002:117). A kallanka is generally definedas a great hall or long structure with a gabled roof supported by a row of pillars setalong the entire length of the long axis that has numerous door openings facing aplaza (Gasparini and Margolies 1980:196). Garcilaso de la Vega provides the mostdetailed description of the Cusco kallankas (1963:198, 260–262). He talks about four

166 JLACA 12 . 1

Figure 1 Cusco: Main plaza of Awkaypata and Kusipata with the possible location of the usnu.

Adapted from Zuidema 1980.

great halls or kallankas, the largest of which was the Qasana compound situated atthe northwest corner of Awkaypata.

In many Inka houses, there were great halls [kallankas] measuring two hundred

paces in length and 50 to 60 paces in width; each hall was one undivided open space

where they held their festivals and dances when rainy weather did not allow them to

celebrate in the plaza outside. In the city of Cozco, I counted four such halls which

were still standing when I was a boy. One was in Amarucancha, among the houses

belonging to Hernando Pizarro, where today the college of the Santa Compañía de

Jesus stands; the other was in Cassana where my schoolmate Juan de Cillorico has

his shops now; and the third one stood in Collcampata among the houses that

belonged to Inca Paullu and his son don Carlos who was also my schoolmate. This

hall was the smallest of the four, and the largest was the one at Cassana, which could

hold three thousand people: this seems incredible as it was wood that had to cover

and vault such vast spaces. The fourth great hall is the one that today serves as the

Catholic Cathedral (Garcilaso de la Vega 1963:198).

Thus according to Garcilaso, the four kallankas differed in size. Size is one of theissues that has plagued a scholarly definition of kallanka in the recent literature(Gasparini and Margolies 1980:196, 210). There are many large and small rectangu-lar buildings with unpartitioned interior space and numerous entryways openingonto plazas. But how long does such a building have to be in order to classify as akallanka? In this essay, I disregard the debate about size, since there is no agreementabout it and use the term kallanka in a general sense that includes any hall-likestructure with multiple doors in the long side facing a plaza.

Garcilaso (1963:198) also says that kallankas sheltered ceremonies and spectatorsin case of inclement weather. Gasparini and Margolies (1980:199–201) discuss howthe uses of kallankas were always public but likely differed depending upon the loca-tion and rank of a settlement within the Inka empire.According to ethnographic evi-dence, some kallankas—including the one that, according to Garcilaso, stood on thesite of today’s Cathedral—functioned as audience and council houses. In conqueredand administered territories away from the Cusco heartland, kallankas probablyserved multiple functions. At times, they may have provided shelter for public eventsduring rainy weather. At other times, they may have been used as temporary lodg-ings for armies and mit’ayuq laborers (individuals who were relocated for a periodof time to serve coerced rotational labor service to the Inka state (see D’Altroy2002:327). The latter was also suggested by Craig Morris (2004b:22–23; Morris andThompson 1985), who excavated one of the two kallankas at Huanuco Pampa andfound no evidence of continuous or permanent occupation in that building.

A final intriguing question with regard to kallankas is whether they constitute aspecifically Inka building type—which is what most scholars assume—or whether

they, perhaps, had pre-Inka prototypes. William Isbell (2006:54–60) reconstructsthe Central Mound or Main Platform on the east side of the Vegachayoq MoqoPalace complex at Huari as a terraced platform with a row of pilasters on the lowerterrace. These pilasters supported a sloping roof, the other side of which rested ontop of a wall originally composed of finely cut ashlars which marked the top of thebuilding. He argues that this structure would have closely resembled an Inkakallanka and faced the courtyard of the U-shaped palace complex. There was nousnu at Vegachayoq Moqo, and thus the architectural design would not be an exam-ple of the pattern under discussion. If the Wari indeed erected kallankas, it wouldbe another case of Inka appropriation of an earlier building form.

Returning to Cusco, kallankas lining the main plaza Awkaypata were in theQasana compound, on the east side where today the Cathedral stands, as well aswithin the Amarukancha and Hatunkancha compounds (for a detailed descriptionand reconstruction of the Cusco main plaza, see Hyslop 1990:34–44; Bauer2004:111–135; Rowe 1967) (Figure 1).

The pattern of a special rock, kallanka/s, and a large plaza was repeated through-out the empire at numerous Inka settlements that had different functions, such as royalestates, administrative centers, border towns, and the new capital in exile, Vilcabambathe Old. It is however absent from other settlements that have the same functions.I address possible explanations for this below, when discussing specific examples. Ingeneral, the pattern may show up at any settlement where the Inka state had a presenceand Inka identity was publicly performed. Its absence may be explained simply by thelack of archaeological excavation and by the geographic particularities of some sites.

The Pattern at Royal Estates

The earliest case is Juchuy Qosqo, Wiraqocha Inka’s estate, which is situated highabove Calca overlooking the Urubamba Valley. The center of Juchuy Qosqo is laidout around the Main Plaza.

A kallanka building constructed on a terrace overlooks the plaza from the south.And on the west side, the plaza is fronted by two square, two-story structures builtof finely-fitted stone masonry up to the second level above which the walls continuein adobe. In the southwestern corner of the plaza, below the kallanka, and next tothe access steps to the upper terraces, sits a prominent and very intriguing sandstoneboulder. Kendall, Early, and Sillar (1992:199) describe it as “a massive irregular col-umn . . . sitting on a pedestal of the exposed natural surface of the site before ter-race leveling and building took place.” They observed slow erosion processesunderneath the boulder and think that the Inka arranged stones around its base.Kendall, Early, and Sillar (1992:199) offer two interpretations: first, the boulderseems to visualize deliberate alignments of light and shadow on the June solstice

168 JLACA 12 . 1

sunrise; second, postulating that the stones around the boulder’s base may consti-tute the remains of a circular wall, they argue that the boulder might have been thebase of a Sunturwasi and that their Sector I, occupied by the buildings around PlazaA2 (turned into a reservoir in the 19th century), functioned as a palace complex. ASunturwasi is a round structure with a doorway and three windows that has a con-ical, thatched roof. It was one of the facilities in a royal palace (see the drawing byGuaman Poma de Ayala (1987:333).

The association of the sandstone boulder with solsticial alignments and with aSunturwasi that is proposed by Kendall, Early, and Sillar is intriguing since Zuidema(1980:318–321) has demonstrated that the Sunturwasi in Cusco was one of the struc-tures needed to conduct solar observations. In the morning of October 30 and Feb-ruary 13, the days when the sun passes through zenith in Cusco, the tall round towerof the Sunturwasi functioned as a gnomen when observed from the two usnus andcast a line of shadow pointing to the sunset on August 18 and April 23 when the suncrosses anti-zenith or nadir in Cusco (see Zuidema’s drawings 1980:318, 319, 320).Kendall, Early, and Sillar (1992:199) vaguely describe a play of light and shadow atsunrise on the June solstice that seems to aim at the boulder. Obviously, the scenar-ios at the Sunturwasi in Cusco and at the speculative Sunturwasi at Juchuy Qosqo

Figure 2 Juchuy Qosqo: Plan of central area.

Adapted from Kendall, Early, and Sillar 1992.

are not the same. However, one might wonder whether any type of association of aforegrounded rock in the pattern with solar alignments may evoke a link with themodel in Cusco. The close proximity between the sandstone boulder and the palacecomplex assumed to be in Sector I further reinforces the parallel with Cusco. Theboulder also constitutes another wak’a with all its symbolic connotations and medi-ating qualities (see below).

Juchuy Qosqo represents a case which brings up a crucial issue with regard tochronology. The chronicles make it very clear that Wiraqocha Inka built JuchuyQosqo and that his son Pachakuti gave central Cusco its present form. Would thatmean that Juchuy Qosqo predates the archetypal model of the pattern under dis-cussion? Can we ascertain under which ruler the Cusco usnu was erected? So far,precise ethnohistoric and archaeological data are lacking and we can only give gen-eral answers. Maria Rostworowski (1999:6–8) offers an ethnohistoric reconstructionof pre-Inka Cusco: the village of Acamama was situated between the Saphy and Tul-lumayo Rivers and contained a quadripartite division into four districts as well as adual division equivalent to the hanan (upper) and hurin (lower in physical and sym-bolic respects) concept. The origin myth of the Ayar brothers speaks of the trans-formation of some of the brothers into powerful stone wak’as. Data of this natureallow for the general argument that certain fundamental spatial divisions of Cuscoand belief structures, such as the metaphorical quality of stone, existed in pre-Inkaand early Inka times. This brings me to argue that the boulder at Juchuy Qosqoconstituted an important stone wak’a symbolizing the pan-Andean sacred essenceof stone material (see below under stone ideology). It was certainly not a stoneusnu, a feature which was formalized by Pachakuti in the process of rebuildingCusco and during the expansion of the Inka state. Bauer (2004:74–78) presents anarchaeological reconstruction of Cusco during the Killke Period (or Early Inka;time period and culture in the Cusco basin immediately preceding the develop-ment of the Inka state) before imperial expansion took place: he documentsnumerous locations within the city where Killke deposits (mostly ceramics, butalso building foundations) have been found. Thus, archaeological data point to anextensive Killke settlement at the site of the later Inka capital; however, these datacannot (yet?) tell us what this settlement looked like and whether it had an usnuand kallankas.

Some of Pachakuti’s private properties exhibit the pattern and Machu Picchu isthe most explicit example. There is a kallanka overlooking a plaza with a carved rockon a lower terrace. In this case, the terrace construction creates the open space of anasymmetrical plaza. The rock is often referred to as the Ceremonial Rock (seeWright and Valencia Zegarra 2001:6–12). Unlike Awkaypata and Kusipata, whichmark the very center of Cusco, this plaza is situated outside the wall which featuresthe official entrance gateway to Machu Picchu. The pattern did not have to be

170 JLACA 12 . 1

manifest inside and in the center of settlements. Indeed, the material evidence oflarge numbers of potsherds from drinking vessels found in the plaza (Wright andValencia Zegarra 2001:12) suggests that drinking chicha was a common activity. Theconsumption of chicha was and is an important component of Andean feasting andritual and it seems very reasonable to argue that Pachakuti organized such festivi-ties for agricultural workers who did not live inside the perimeter wall of his estateand for other local people from the surrounding area (Salazar 2004:47). The Cere-monial Rock was beautifully sculpted into platforms and steps and could have func-tioned as a seat and altar during such rituals.

Wright and Valencia Zegarra (2001:8–10) note that some round rocks strewnaround this boulder sculpture come from the Urubamba River to make the sacredriver which gushes deep below and the watery underworld present. Furthermore, thiscarved rock appears to be an example par excellence of an usnu. I discuss this below.

Figure 3 Machu Picchu: Plaza, kallanka, and carved rock,

commonly known as the “Ceremonial Rock.”

Plan drawing by Jessica Christie.

Vitcos, another royal estate of Pachakuti, is situated on a flattened ridge and hasa small plaza lined by kallanka-like buildings. From this possible palace complex, anInka road led south to another terraced hill which holds the building group thatencloses the sculpted Yurak Rumi Rock (see Lee 2000). Vitcos demonstrates thearchitectural sculptural features of the pattern—a modest plaza, kallanka-likestructures, and a special sculpted rock—but their spatial alignment is disconnected.Therefore Vitcos may not share the pattern which would align it with Pisaq andOllantaytambo, two additional and very important estates of Pachakuti located inthe Urubamba Valley. Pisaq is divided into numerous sectors which crown themountain ridge line overlooking the valley and the contemporary town of Pisaq. Inthis case, the topography was not conducive for elaborating the pattern since theridge locations do not provide sufficient space to construct large plazas. Ollantay-tambo as well had different sectors, one in the flat valley bottom of the PatakanchaRiver and the other on the hillside which contains the famous so-called Sun Temple.There would certainly have been space for the pattern but the Inka apparently didnot use it here. This impression is based upon the structures and spaces visibletoday. But Ollantaytambo has been remodeled more often than Pachakuti’s otherestates: Manqo Inka used it as a military fortress; the late Inka architectural style ofthe ‘Araqhama Sector; and the contemporary town which occupies and sits on topof part of the Inka site. Jean-Pierre Protzen (1993:50–53) has shown that there wasindeed a plaza opening within the kancha zone and he thinks this plaza was

172 JLACA 12 . 1

Figure 4 Machu Picchu: Carved rock known as the “Ceremonial Rock.”

Photo by Jessica Christie.

bounded by kallankas. This area has been built over with houses and if there everwas a sacred rock, it has disappeared. Therefore the pattern cannot be documentedfor Ollantaytambo.

Amaru Thupa Inka, Pachakuti’s oldest son who was supposed to becomeemperor according to the system of succession, used the same architectural patternin his estate at Callachaca. Callachaca spreads in several sectors over the hillsides eastof Cusco. The one of interest is Susan Niles’ Sector F (Niles 1987:fig.1.3, 106–114).What she calls the T-shaped Plaza Group is a plaza in the form of a thick-stemmedT which is fronted by two partly preserved kallanka-like halls in the north and by arock outcrop in the south.

The rear walls of the kallankas were built into a hill and their doorways openonto the plaza. The outcrop exhibits several manmade modifications which Nilesdescribes as nooks and elaborations of natural crevices some of which evidencehigh skills of craftsmanship. She interprets the resulting chamber-like open spacesas tombs. On its south side, the outcrop has at least one seat-like sculpture facingsouth across the Huatanay Valley which means away from the plaza. Further, thissculpture is not visible from the plaza. Therefore, while it could well have functionedas a seat or throne, its ritual context was most likely unrelated to the T-shaped plaza.Chinchero, the well documented estate of Thupa Inka Yupanki, offers another caseof our pattern. Here it focuses on Structure 11 and several carved rocks which form

Figure 5 Callachaca: Sector F, T-shaped plaza group, plan.

Drawing by Susan Niles.

the southeastern corner of the Great Plaza (for a detailed analysis of the architec-ture, see Alcina Franch 1976:100–114).

Structure 11 was built over a natural outcrop resulting in a pyramidal volumewhich consists of four platform levels. The carved outcrop Pumaccacca constitutesthe focal point of Structure 11 and sits approximately at its center. It towers aboutsix meters above the level of the Great Plaza and Alcina Franch (1976:106) likens itsform “to an eruption of the mountain coming out of its interior, which turns overon the outside and overflows.” I think this verbal image may well describe part ofthe sacred character the Inka saw in this rock. The carvings are vertical and hori-zontal cuts forming planes and two sculpted pumas with crossed legs.

Pumaccacca has to be understood in relation to four other carved rocks situatednearby: first is a smaller rock with a seat-like carving which is located at the foot ofStructure 1 and in the southeastern corner of the Great Plaza (Figure 6); the secondand third sculpted rocks sit on the third platform; the fourth carved boulder is ontop of the outcrop on and around which Structure 11 was built.

Structure 11 with Pumaccacca and the four additional carved rocks is situated inthe southeast corner of the Great Plaza (Figure 6). The south side of the Plaza islined by Structures 1, 2, and 3. In particular, Structures 1 and 3 form long rectangles

174 JLACA 12 . 1

Figure 6 Chinchero: Plan of Great Plaza area.

Adapted from Alcina Franch 1976.

which open to the Plaza with six (Structure 1) and seven (Structure 3) double-jambwindows or entryways (see Figure 6). Structure 1 measures 48 meters in length,Structure 2 is 17.80 meters, and Structure 3 is 42 meters long (Gasparini and Margolies1980:214). They are built on a terrace and their floor level is higher than that of theplaza and therefore access is accomplished from the short lateral sides via two pas-sageways between the buildings. They exhibit the general diagnostics of kallankasand I think at least Structures 1 and 3 fall into this category. The elevated level andthe lateral access to the Chinchero kallankas might have made it difficult for largenumbers of people to enter at one time but the elevation is low enough that theopenings to the plaza could as well have been used as doorways.

Thus the setting and formal elements of Pumaccacca as well as some of the asso-ciated smaller carved rocks make them excellent candidates for the pattern with thetype of usnu that functioned as elevated throne of the ruler. These issues will beexplored in greater depth in Section Two.

Wayna Qhapaq’s well documented estate at Urubamba and Yucay also used thepattern, though in a diminished form, in the palace complex of Quispiguanca. Nilesand Robert Batson (Niles 1999) investigated the standing architectural remains,placed them in context, and documented them in a number of plan and recon-struction drawings, some of them in color.

The drawings illustrate that the monumental entrance to Quispiguanca lay onthe east side of the complex between two gatehouses. Once the visitor had passedthrough the portal, he or she stood in the main plaza in the middle of which sat a

Figure 7 Chinchero: Structure 11, Pumaccacca, carvings.

pronounced white boulder and a possible platform construction. North of this plaza,there were two symmetrical kancha compounds facing each other across an openspace. On the side toward the open space, each kancha was fronted by a kallanka andtwo small rectangular buildings occupied the middle of the open space. Niles (1999:fig.6.2, 171–176), who shows that the unmodified white boulder is not at the exactcenter point of the plaza, argues that it was accompanied by another structure, pos-sibly a platform, which marked the precise midpoint. The latter probably functionedas a shrine. It is now topped by a Catholic chapel located at the east end of the pres-ent cemetery and therefore cannot be reconstructed. Niles also thinks that water mayhave been channeled through the midline of the plaza, over or around the rock andits shrine, and on to the south terrace wall. Today water drops down the south ter-race façade of the palace and during Wayna Qhapaq’s time, it would have been col-lected in an artificial lake described in the documents (Villanueva Urteaga 1971:38).In 2003, INC (Instituto Nacional de la Cultura) was excavating at Quispiguanca.

The Quispiguanca example reinforces our pattern with a foregrounded butuncarved rock. The fact that we have no idea whether there truly was an adjacentstructure and if so, what it looked like, opens doors to speculation. It simply seemsreasonable to suggest that given the central position of the white boulder and itspossible companion structure, the two served as a focal point for ritual activity. Thisritual activity could have been primarily political and related to the usnu concept,and it is conceivable that Wayna Qhapaq sat on the speculative platform overseeingevents on the plaza. Or the rituals might have been religious in nature, during whichofferings were brought to the boulder and water.

The cases discussed above represent royal estates of Inka rulers presented in achronological order and situated in a reasonable vicinity to Cusco. We have seen thatthe pattern using a sculpted rock is most strongly developed on the properties of

176 JLACA 12 . 1

Figure 8 Urubamba: Quispiguanca Palace, reconstruction.

Drawing by Susan Niles and Robert Batson.

Pachakuti and his sons Thupa Inka and Amaru Thupa Inka while his father WiraqochaInka and Wayna Qhapaq used uncarved boulders. Let us now look at governance sitesand administrative centers further away from Cusco to investigate where the pattern ispresent. Royal estates can be closely connected with individual rulers and remained theproperties of their panacas (royal lineages composed of the descendants of thedeceased ruler but excluding the son who became the new ruler). Governance andadministrative sites are more problematic because historical and archaeological datado not always clearly link them with specific rulers, and because they typically experi-enced various rebuilding phases and are often partly covered by present-day towns.Further, the number of cases I present can by no means claim to be a complete list ofall Inka sites with the pattern. My goal is to introduce a representative sample to builda solid argument that the pattern this study is investigating is indeed meaningful andwas deliberately employed in a significant number of Inka settlements.

The Pattern at Outlying Governance Sites and Administrative Centers

An example far away from the capital is the immense sculpted outcrop ofSamaipata in Bolivia. It is not entirely clear whether the Inka settlement ofSamaipata was constructed during the reigns of Pachakuti, Thupa Inka Yupanki,or Wayna Qhapaq. The crucial point is that it has a Great Plaza faced by a kallankaand overlooking both is the gigantic outcrop.

Figure 9 Samaipata: Plan view of site.

Drawing by Albert Meyers.

Among many other carvings, the south side of the rock displays a long row ofsculpted seats from which spectators could have observed events in the plaza. Thus,in this case, the foregrounded rock could have served as an usnu for a number of indi-viduals. Indeed, Albert Meyers (1998:67) has called the carved outcrop a giant usnu.

While this remains a possibility, it is also a great oversimplification of thecomplicated case of Samaipata. The outcrop exhibits a large number of sculpturesserving a variety of purposes, for example, the long canals with the rhomboid pat-tern versus the seats and niches. Albert Meyers (1997) distinguishes two phases inthe process of carving and elaborating the rock: in the first phase, the Inka wouldhave sculpted the canals, seats, and steps. When integrated into ritual performance,these works would have forced the participants to look down or to orient themselvestoward the rock and the earth. In the second phase, Inka artisans cut the niches intothe north and south sides of the outcrop, added the possible temple walls to thesouth side as well as the L-shaped wall with niches on top of the rock. During ritualperformance, participants would now face the niches which might have been filledwith figurines or mummies. Their vision would expand further toward the horizonand mountain peaks and would no longer remain static and earth-bound. Accord-ing to Meyers (1997), this view toward the horizon line and the sky and the use oftransportable objects is characteristic of a conquest society. There is also the issueof distance. Anybody sitting on the carved rock seats would not be able to recognizespecific actors and events held on the plaza without the use of binoculars.

Nevertheless, it seems legitimate to argue that the monumental presence of thegiant outcrop always loomed above the ritual participants in the plaza as a constantreminder of the symbolic and mediating qualities associated with the essence of

178 JLACA 12 . 1

Figure 10 Samaipata: Carved outcrop, south side, niches and seats above.

stone in Andean worldview (see more below). As an afterthought, it is intriguingthat Albert Meyers and Cornelius Ulbert (1997) documented a plaza containing astepped platform with a stairway facing a kallanka at the northern complex ofthe site of La Fortaleza located some 50 km air-line distance east of Samaipata.This constitutes a clear example of the pattern under discussion: a plaza, a kallanka,and a foregrounded rock that has been replaced by an usnu construction.

Inkallaqta was another settlement located far to the south, east of Cochabamba,in the area of the ancient Pocona in what is now Bolivia (Gasparini and Margolies1980:207–212). Roberto Teran (cited by Gasparini and Margolies 1980:210) notes thatit was built by Thupa Inka between 1463 and 1472. Inkallaqta has a very largekallanka measuring 78 meters long by 26 wide and covering an area of 2028 squaremeters. The façade fronting the plaza exhibits twelve narrow doorways. Between thesixth and the seventh doors are the remains of a small stepped platform which hasbeen identified as an usnu (see Zuidema 1980 above). Thus, the Inkallaqta caseshows an interesting play of scale: a miniature usnu abutting an exceptionally largekallanka. A variant of the pattern under discussion appears to be present in thatInkallaqta has a small stepped platform instead of the foregrounded rock.

Going north, an important administrative center in the northern highlands sit-uated on the qhapaq nan (north-south imperial road) was Huanuco Pampa, whichwas investigated by Craig Morris (Morris and Thompson 1985). Huanuco Pampahas a large plaza with a dominant usnu platform near its center (Hyslop 1990:27,203–206, 215–218; Morris 2004b:42–56). Elite architecture borders the east side of theplaza, which is known as Sector IIB. The entrance to this elite sector passes betweentwo kallankas (Gasparini and Margolies 1980:201–206). Sector IIB is composed of aseries of patio enclosures used for feasting with increasingly restricted access as onemoves from the plaza to the inner patios. The gateways leading to the individualenclosures are aligned with the usnu platform in the plaza. Again, a variant of thepattern is present with the centrally situated usnu in the large plaza and twokallankas forming the main entrance to the elite Sector IIB. Yet the usnu is amasonry platform and not a carved rock.

Further south and also located along the qhapaq nan was the administrativecenter of Vilcaswaman which Cieza de León (1959:126) describes as the geograph-ical middle or center of the Inka empire because the distance from Quito to Vil-caswaman was said to equal the distance from Vilcaswaman to Chile. Accordingto Cieza de León (1959:126–127), Pachakuti began construction at Vilcaswamanand Thupa Inka enlarged it and commissioned additional buildings. Although thefeatures of the pattern are not well preserved, it is clearly present: in what used tobe the Inka plaza stands an usnu which originally consisted of five stepped plat-forms. This usnu was set into a walled compound and accessed through probablythree double-jamb doorways (Gasparini and Margolies 1980:271–277). The sur-viving central door opens directly to the single stairway which leads to the top

platform of the usnu where a cube-like stone block with two precisely cut seatsstill stands. It represents a wonderful merging of the usnu concepts of the stackedplatforms and the sculpted stone seats. The remains of a large kallanka-type struc-ture are found behind the usnu. What makes Vilcaswaman further so importantis the fact that two detailed descriptions of its usnu and how it was used have sur-vived (see below).

Chronologically the latest example is Vilcabamba the Old documented by Vin-cent Lee (2000). Vilcabamba was Manqo Inka’s last refuge where he built a newcapital that was likely inspired by the layout and the divisions of Cusco (Lee2000:413; Christie 2006a). Nicole Delia Legnani (2005:36) has reinforced that Vil-cabamba was envisioned as a new Cusco and new Inka center of Qhapaq status inher reading of the Titu Cusi manuscript: for example, because Manqo Inka trans-ferred the Sun idol Punchaw from Cusco to Vilcabamba. Punchaw had been com-missioned by Pachakuti and embodied the belief that the Inka were descendants ofInti, the Sun, and it was further coupled with the Inka’s sacred right of territorialexpansion. Given the fact that the entire site is covered by dense jungle, the sur-veying and mapping work Lee undertook is absolutely remarkable. At the sametime, as INC excavations are now being conducted (in 2005), some of his plans mayhave to be altered. It appears that Vilcabamba the Old was divided into a physicallyUpper and Lower Sector of buildings. Roughly in between these sectors entered themain road from the southeast: it passes by fountains which have run dry, crosses a

180 JLACA 12 . 1

Figure 11 Vilcabamba the Old: Reconstruction of Central Sector.

Drawing by Vincent Lee.

stream, and after being squeezed in tightly between Building Groups 14 and 15, itopens into the main plaza. This plaza is bordered by Groups 16 and 17 in the south-west and northeast and by a long kallanka hall in the northwest. Lee (2000:413)interprets Groups 14 and 16 as hanan (upper) and 15 and 17 as hurin (lower) sec-tors in the context of the plaza. On the northeast side of the kallanka and connectedto it by a wall sits a large unmodified boulder.

It measures nearly eight by twelve meters across and five meters high and Lee(2000:413) thinks it may be oriented “toward the ushnu-like platform of Group 16.”I find this association too speculative since the platform of Group 16 is really a ter-race accessed by a short stairway, whose other function is that of a platform foun-dation for a kancha formation of houses. The prominence of the boulder and itsconnection with high-status architecture are unquestionable.

It has to be repeated that Vilcabamba is situated in deep lowland jungle, a nat-ural environment unfamiliar to the Inka. High mountains are absent and theirsymbolic connotations most likely poorly understood by local people. Therefore,it is significant that Manqo Inka placed or left the boulder (I assume this was theoriginal position of the large block) in such a prominent spot. I suggest his inten-tion was to replicate the architectural pattern used by his predecessors, which Ihave been documenting. The claim articulated by the plaza-kallanka-special rockconfiguration was that Vilcabamba was meant to be a new version of Cusco and aroyal property.

Figure 12 Vilcabamba the Old: Foregrounded boulder.

Relationships between Carved Rock Wak’as and Usnus

The most tantalizing and complex element of the pattern is without a doubt the spe-cial rock. Its archetypal Cusco version was known as the usnu or possibly two usnus(Zuidema 1980). There remains much confusion in the literature about what theusnu(s) looked like and where exactly it/they stood because the accounts by thechroniclers are fragmentary and inconsistent on this issue. In this section, I firstreconstruct what we know about the Cusco usnu and show which foregroundedrocks in the pattern may most closely resemble it in physical form. Secondly, I addressconceptual aspects of stone as a material in Andean worldview which may link theformally different rock wak’as and usnus of the pattern on a symbolic spiritual level.

In Cusco, Betanzos describes the usnu as “a stone made like a sugarloaf pointedon top and covered with a strip of gold” (1996:47–49). Associated with it or next toit was a stone font or basin for holding liquids. Around this stone font, the peopleof Cusco buried gold statuettes representing the most important lords of each lin-eage in the city. “In the middle of the font they put the stone that represented theSun” (Betanzos 1996:48). This was meant as an offering to the Sun, mirroring thesocial organization of Cusco and its history. It might very well have constituted aparallel to the zeq’e system (a radial system of forty-one imagined lines defined byshrines/wak’as) which had its center in the Qorikancha (the Inka Temple of theSun) and each radiating zeq’e was maintained by a Cusco lineage. In this manner,the two symbolic centers of Cusco, the usnu and Qorikancha, merged.

It is significant that Betanzos clearly distinguishes between the stone or goldstatue representing the Sun which was kept in the Sun Temple and the stone usnuin the plaza. He explains (Betanzos 1996:48) that the stone (usnu) in the plaza wasfor the common people to worship while the statue of the Sun in the temple was forthe lords. The ceremony during which this Sun statue was placed on the font was asymbolic performance of the discourse between the ruler and his subjects. Whenthe Sun stood upon the font or basin made to hold liquids which could be drainedthrough underground channels, it became the symbolic axis mundi or world axisconnecting the vertical divisions of the cosmos. This was the role appropriated bythe Inka ruler for himself and acted out when he sat on any usnu. His subjects stoodand perhaps were grouped around him like the gold statuettes they had buried inthe ground. I suggest such a symbolic context was paramount for the architecturalpattern under discussion and that it provided the stage background for similarinteractions between the ruler and commoners at many other settlements.

In three authoritative publications, John Hyslop (1990:69–101), Zuidema (1980),and F. M. Meddens (1997) have discussed the Cusco usnus, other usnus, and thecomplex symbolic connotations associated with them. They conclude that usnuscould assume a number of material forms: they could be stone pillars, stone seats,

182 JLACA 12 . 1

stone basins or fonts linked to underground channels, platforms, or truncated pyr-amids. Depending on their forms, usnus could have a variety of functions. Hyslop(1990:70–72) focuses on usnu platforms and observes that they are rare to absent inthe immediate Cusco region but common in conquered territories. He implies thatthe concept of the personified axis mundi as defined in Cusco functioned as a statesymbol and was exported to the outlying regions of the empire. As explained above,the axis mundi could be called into presence interchangeably by the Sun idol placedupon the font or by the ruler seated on an usnu platform in the main plaza. Thususnu platforms and/or seats brought together Inka nobility who would assume theelevated position on the usnus and common and non-Inka peoples who occupiedthe great plazas. When the ruler took his position upon the usnu, he oversaw ritualsand military reviews, addressed his army, and perhaps also spoke justice in the roleof a judge (see Gasparini and Margolies 1980:271). In reference to the Cusco exam-ple, the usnu may have stood precisely between the Awkaypata and Kusipata plazasectors. In the greater context of the capital, the whole main plaza constituted thedividing line between the hanan (upper) and hurin (lower) divisions and the fourroads of the empire departed from it to the four suyus (quarters of the empire). Thedualistic and quadripartite structures of Inka social and political organization maywell have been reflected in the Awkaypata—Kusipata division and performed anddramatized on the usnu (see Rostworowski 1983:130–179).

Zuidema (1980:357) emphasizes the idea that the usnu symbolizes an opening inthe ground through which the earth sucks in rain water; this aspect of the usnu takeson material substance in the basin and drainage system as well as in the canalizedSaphy River if indeed it stood on top of it. Angles Vargas (1988:76–77) and othersplace the usnu exactly in between the Awkaypata and Kusipata sectors on top of thecanalized Saphy River. In this interpretation, it had direct access to undergroundwaterways and its mediating qualities were physically brought out by its very positionbetween Awkaypata and Kusipata.

But the usnu also marks an observation point of the Sun (Zuidema 1980:318–331). At least a dozen chroniclers mention the existence of sets of small towersor stone pillars on the eastern and western horizons of Cusco (Bauer and Dearborn1995:67–100, Hyslop 1990:61–62). One point of observation may have been the usnuin the Awkaypata plaza. The Anonymous Chronicler (in Bauer and Dearborn 1995:35)describes the four western pillars and states that:

When the sun reached the first pillar they prepared for the general planting and

began to plant vegetables in the heights, as slower [to mature], and when the sun

reached the two pillars in the middle, was the point and the general time of the plant-

ing in Cuzco, and it was always in the month of August. It is in this way that, to take

the point of the sun between the central two pillars they had another pillar in the

middle of the plaza, [a] pillar of well worked stone one estado in height, in a suitable

indicated place, that they called usnu, and from there they watched the sun between

the two pillars, and when it was exactly there, it was the time for sowing in the Cuzco

Valley and its region.

While the Anonymous Chronicler states that sunset between the western central pil-lars was observed from the usnu, he does not say who watched it. We might assumethat he implies the ruler seated on the Cusco usnu. Dearborn (2000) makes the inter-esting argument that the distances between the pillars which the Anonymous Chron-icler provides are much too wide to specify a precise date. According to Dearborn’scalculations, the Sun would appear to set between the central pillars for nearly a weekas seen from the usnu in mid-August. The large separation of the pillars also allowedmost of the people gathered in Awkaypata/Kusipata to watch the sunset and notexclusively the ruling Inka on the usnu. Dearborn concludes that the primary objec-tive of solar observation from the Cusco usnu was not astronomical in the sense offixing a precise date, but ritual, meaning that all the people in the plaza watched theSun set. Dearborn’s argument gives important insights into the discourse betweenthe ruler and common people as it was acted out at the usnu in the context of watch-ing the Sun, who himself was an Inka deity and the progenitor of the ruling Inkadynasty. Zuidema (1980:331) observes that on four important dates in each year, theSun and the Moon stood exactly above at zenith and below at nadir of the Cuscousnu, reversing their positions between noon and midnight. This alignment furtherimparts the usnu a role of central axis between the underworld and the sky. Meddens(1997:10) stresses the roles of different usnus as seats of the Sun or of the Inka ruler.

One important issue in the usnu discussion which bears upon the pattern understudy is the question of its origin. Zuidema (1978 cited by Hyslop 1990:72) thinksthat the usnu as a platform developed from the seat of the Sun or the stone set inthe Awkaypata plaza of Cusco. In this scenario, the Cusco usnu would represent theearliest prototype for all later usnus and this line of reasoning would best supportmy argument in this essay. However, Santiago Agurto (cited by Hyslop 1990:72–73)has linked the usnu platform as an architectural form with pre-contact Andeancoastal traditions in which buildings were commonly constructed from solidmasses. Inka architecture, on the other hand, does not usually emphasize solid build-ings. The hypothesis that solid buildings from the north coast inspired usnu plat-forms fits well with the observation that these platforms are rare in the immediateCusco area but are found in outlying settlements established during the Inka state’sexpansion often after the coast had been conquered. The origin of the usnu as astone-basin-drain complex may be a separate matter. Examples of these featuresare fewer than the platform since their documentation requires archaeologicalexcavation. Known Inka cases include Cusco, the platform in Vilcaswaman (Meddens1997:5), and one of the platforms framing the lower plaza of Sayhuite. John Staller

184 JLACA 12 . 1

(N.d.) sees the stone-basin-drain aspect of the usnu as a concept tied to pan-Andeanconcerns with structure versus fluidity and the ritual use of liquids and drains.

The debate of the origin of the usnu affects this discussion because if the Cuscoexample truly constitutes the earliest prototype of the usnu, my argument stands onsolid ground. If the usnu concept developed in the wake of Inka conquest and stateexpansion, then my argument is considerably weaker. I think that the usnu conceptevolved from the shared pan-Andean symbolic associations surrounding stone. Mostlikely, there had been some kind of rock wak’a in the Cusco plaza before the rebuild-ing of the city under Pachakuti took place. Pachakuti and his successors devised theusnu as a special category of foregrounded rocks and as a state symbol and manifes-tation of Inka stone ideology. The formal vocabulary of the usnu was expanded froma single stone to include the basin and drain complex, seats, and the solid platform.

It appears that there were many different types of usnus and various functionsthey could fulfill. Each individual usnu did not play all its possible roles and I thinkthat many carved rocks and particularly those which fall in the pattern under dis-cussion shared aspects of the usnu as defined by Hyslop, Zuidema, and Meddens.In my view, Inka carved, sacred, and foregrounded rocks constituted a categorymuch broader than usnus, and some of them exemplified the usnu concept asdefined above. For example, the cases from Machu Picchu and Chinchero displaycarved seats or platforms which relate them to the usnu platform. Evidence for liba-tion rites exists at many rocks in the form of sculpted channels; some examplesinclude Samaipata, Kenko Grande, and Sayhuite. I don’t feel comfortable calling theforegrounded rocks in this study outright usnus; for instance, Carolyn Dean (2006)rightfully pointed out that usnu is one of the terms all too often “abused” by schol-ars to quickly designate any platform in any Inka plaza and that this term must bemore critically used and more carefully defined. Yet they all share the material ofstone with the Cusco usnu and more or less formal features, which justifies the con-clusion that they had similar functions in the context of ritual performance.As I willargue below, the material essence of stone and its underlying symbolic qualitieswere the crucial bond that linked the Cusco usnu with all foregrounded rocks.

At Machu Picchu, the Ceremonial Rock was beautifully sculpted into platformsand steps and could well have functioned as an usnu during rituals (Figure 4).Indeed, the material evidence of large numbers of potsherds from drinking vesselsfound in the plaza (Wright and Valencia Zegarra 2001:12) suggests that drinkingchicha was a common activity. The consumption of chicha was and is an impor-tant component of Andean feasting and ritual and it seems very reasonable toargue that Pachakuti organized such festivities for agricultural workers who didnot live inside the walls of his estate and other local people from the surroundingarea (Salazar 2004:47). Wright and Valencia Zegarra (2001:8–10) note that someround rocks strewn around this boulder sculpture come from the Urubamba Riverto metaphorically make the sacred river and the watery underworld present at the

rock and in the plaza. It is well conceivable that Pachakuti would have used the Cer-emonial Rock as an usnu: when he had taken seat on the platform, he mediated inritual between the lower cosmological layers and his father the Sun on behalf of hissubjects who would have gathered around him in the plaza. Rituals of this naturebrought to life before the eyes of local people aspects of state ideology which hadbeen devised in Cusco, and that is what the pattern under study is all about.Guaman Poma de Ayala (1987:377, 391, 407) drew the royal usnu three times in asimilar form as a stepped pyramid: Guaman’s page 398 illustrates Manqo Inka dur-ing his coronation ceremony on the stepped usnu in Cusco; page 374/384 shows

186 JLACA 12 . 1

Figure 13 Guaman Poma de Ayala, 398: Manqo Inka seated on the Cusco usnu.

Atawallpa seated on a stepped usnu in Cajamarca and Guaman’s page 369 depictsa stepped structure in the background of a scene with Wayna Qhapaq in Cusco.

At Chinchero, Pumaccacca and some of the nearby smaller carved rocks mayhave been used in a similar fashion as usnus in the form of elevated thrones of theruler. When seated on one of the platforms of Pumaccacca, Thupa Inka Yupankicould have easily overseen and commanded events in the plaza. More mysteriousare the two sculpted pumas. In the rare cases in Inka rock art where figurativeimagery occurs, the puma is most frequently represented. This could be due to thegeneral pan-Andean belief that the feline was charged with special powers.We knowthat Pachakuti wore a puma skin when he went to war (Salazar 2004:36). However,in this case, Pumaccacca could be an attempt to copy Pumaurqu, the place of emer-gence and origin of the Inka, and transfer it to Chinchero. Pumaurqu located southof Cusco in the Province of Paruro is a much larger and taller outcrop. Its top sur-face is similarly carved into seats, planes, and platforms and displays two pumas.While very speculative, Thupa Inka might have intended to align himself with thispowerful origin place and especially with Manqo Qhapaq, the first mytho-histori-cal ruler in the Inka dynasty. We know that Pachakuti, his father, ordered Pumau-rqu be turned into a wak’a and that he most likely commissioned the carvings (afterSarmiento de Gamboa 1942:107). The origin places, Tampu T’oqo and Pacariq-tambo, mentioned by Sarmiento de Gamboa have been identified with the sculptedoutcrop of Pumaurqu and the nearby Inka settlement Maukallaqta (Bauer 1992:109–123; Christie and Staller 2004). It is conceivable that Pachakuti’s son wanted tore-create his own Pumaurqu at his personal estate of Chinchero. If this line ofreasoning holds true, it would add another significant symbolic layer to the com-plex concept of the usnu. Meddens (1997:10) interprets pumas, and especially thoseportrayed on usnus, as forces controlling water and fertility. His reasoning is derivedfrom the rich iconography of the sculpted Sayhuite stone, which includes felinesand channels for liquids.

Vilcaswaman represents a third case in which a sculpted rock is clearly part ofan usnu. The whole usnu construction consists of a stepped platform with a singlestairway surrounded by a compound wall which possibly had four doorways (Gas-parini and Margolies 1980:112–116, 271–277). On top of the platform still stands acube-like stone block sculpted into two seats with armrests. Two unique sourcesbring to life and validate the ritual spaces and performances at the usnu in the con-text of the pattern for Vilcaswaman. The earlier writer is Cieza de León who closelydescribes the plaza and its usnu:

To one side of this plain, toward the rising sun, there was a shrine for the Lord-Incas,

of stone, from which small terraces emerged, about six feet wide, where other enclo-

sures came together, and at the center there was a bench where the Lord-Inca sat to

pray, all of a single stone so large that it was eleven feet long and seven feet wide, with

two seats cut for the aforesaid purpose. They say this stone used to be covered with

jewels of gold and precious stones to adorn this place they so venerated and

esteemed, and on another stone, not small, now in the middle of this square, like a

baptismal font, was where they sacrificed animals and young children (so they say),

whose blood was offered up to the gods (1959:126–127).

The second source is part of a description of the province of Vilcaswaman made byCorregidor Don Pedro de Carabajal in 1586:

There was a plaza large enough to hold more than twenty thousand men, which the

Inka ordered to construct by hand and to accomplish this, he had to drain a large

water pond. In front of the House of the Sun, there was a platform fenced in by a

stone wall five estados high; it had a stairway of finely cut stones which facilitated

theatrical effects so that the Inka could disappear and walk up to be seen; and on top

stood two large stone thrones covered with gold where the Inka and his wife were

seated like in a stand and from there they worshipped the sun; and when the Inka sat

on the usnu, his whole guard protected the doors with utmost watchfulness; and

there the Inka sat below a great canopy of the most colorful feathers, and the sup-

port posts upon which rested the roof were of gold, and 12 old captains of the Inka’s

panaca carried the canopy. In their language, this canopy is called achigua. . . . He

continues to describe sacrifices made to major deities for the wellbeing of the Inka

and his family (Jimenez de la Espada 1965:218–219).

The two text passages cited bring together the material forms of the usnu as plat-form and carved stone seat and they dramatize ritual practices of mediationthrough the persona of the ruler at the center of Vilcaswaman, which itself wasviewed as a symbolic center of the empire. It is of great interest that Cieza de Leónand Don Pedro de Carabajal describe two seats/thrones on top of the usnu platformand that the very stone block with the two carved seats has indeed survived. Whooccupied the second throne? Was it the qoya, the Inka’s wife, as Don Pedro deCarabajal suggests, or did the two seats unite the two functions of the usnu: throneand altar, political and religious, secular and sacred (Gasparini and Margolies 1980:269)? The Vilcaswaman usnu has to be included as a significant case study in anyreconstruction of events surrounding usnus.

The variation of the pattern has most likely to do with the complexity of theusnu. The Cusco usnu was an upright stone, a seat, and a stone font with drainagechannels. Perhaps the Inka evoked the concept of the usnu by one or a combinationof the above features: Juchuy Qosqo uses the upright stone only while Samaipatashows a combination of all the elements and more. Most variation seems to have

188 JLACA 12 . 1

occurred with the seat. The seat could be a bench typically carved out of a boulderas at Machu Picchu or Chinchero; but it could also be a small or large masonry plat-form as at Inkallaqta and Huanuco Pampa or combine both as at Vilcaswaman. Ispeculate that the choice of the seat feature may have been due to the availability ofa boulder suitable for sculpting, and to the intended ritual requirements for whichthe seat was to be used. For example, royal estates were closely tied to individualrulers and their plazas were relatively small. The carved stone seats/usnus at MachuPicchu and Chinchero probably acted as thrones for Pachakuti and Thupa Inkafrom which they addressed their people and directed ceremonies. Huanuco Pampa,on the other hand, was a fairly remote administrative center where the ruler wasrarely present. State officials had to address and control the local populace. It is pos-sibly for these reasons that they needed a very large plaza with a large seat turnedinto a masonry platform from which several leaders could direct and control a largeaudience.

So far, I have focused on formal and visual resemblances between the Cuscousnu, Guaman Poma de Ayala’s drawings, and certain case studies of the pattern. Ona more general level, what links together usnus and all foregrounded rocks in thepattern is the fact that they all functioned as wak’as and were made of stone. I arguethat first and foremost, all the special rocks which fall under the pattern were wak’aswith all their symbolic connotations and mediating qualities addressed by manywriters. Frank Salomon (1998:7–17; Salomon and Urioste 1991:16–19) examineswak’as from a linguistic perspective through the language in the Huarochiri manu-script written in Quechua. He shows that wak’as, like people, plants, and animals,pass through several states of being: “from kinetic, fleshy, fast-changing . . . towardstatic, hard, slow-changing” (1998:9). As the actions of a being become more ener-getic and powerful, it moves from a soft biotic state to a hard state full of perma-nence. Since this process appears to be the same for wak’as, people, plants, andanimals, it follows that they all would be subject to similar life forces and animatingessences, thus establishing a clear parallel between wak’as and humans. The finalstates of permanence are visualized in deified mountains, other land features, androck wak’as. In Andean thought, there is a continuum from transitory to durablemodes of being, the latter being materialized by stone, mountains, and sculptedrock wak’as. It implies that the rock wak’as had not always been hard and timelessbut had passed through softer, more pliable material stages. It probably did not mat-ter whether a boulder was sculpted or not—what mattered was the material essenceand quality of stone which manifested its permanent and timeless state of existence.Cesar Paternosto (1996:179–186) discusses these qualities under the term tectonic,which includes all that is related to construction but also refers to the earth’s crustand the geological formations which gave rise to the Andean landscape. Stonewak’as belong to both aspects of the tectonic. At the same time, though, not all

natural stones were wak’as. Those foregrounded in the pattern under discussionwere thoughtfully selected, some were carved, and deliberately placed into a spe-cific architectural and spatial context meaning that in many cases the rocks stoodthere first and architectural space (plaza, kallanka) was designed around them. Thediffering states of being for humans and the natural world were brought into rela-tionship through ritual at the rock wak’as and in the adjoining plazas andkallankas. While the ritual participants—people and wak’as—interacted asym-metrically with the wak’as being the more durable and hence more powerful, rit-ual activities mediated between the multiple and complex inhabitants of thecosmos and states of existence, made them understandable, and reinforced coher-ence (see also Allen 1998:25).

Maarten van de Guchte (1990:237–271) superbly explores the complex layers ofthe concept wak’a based upon ethnographic and linguistic sources. He notices thatwhile Spanish writers in the 16th century tended to focus on wak’as as objects, in the17th century, there was a greater interest in the processual and ritual characteristicsof wak’as and they are treated in the literature as living dynamic forces charged withspiritual powers. Wak’as can be material movable objects or localized features in alandscape, such as a building or water source. Wak’as can make sounds and speakin human languages and have relations with weather phenomena and the celestialbodies and wak’as may have unusual physical features which separate them fromnormal people and natural objects. Wak’as in all these categories lively interact withhumans and we recall Guaman Poma’s (1987:253) well known drawing of ThupaInka addressing a group of wak’as many of which are carved stones. All such dis-course between wak’as and humans, between the landscape and humans is based onthe principle of reciprocity central to Andean thinking. Reciprocity (ayni) cementsAndean social and economic lives in the form of a vertically-organized trade systembetween altitude zones and reciprocity was fundamental in the political obligationsbetween the Inka state and its subjects (Stone-Miller 2002:15–16). Reciprocity alsocharacterizes the relations between man/nature and man/supernatural beings andalways invokes mediation and dialogue rather than dominance. Of course, the con-cept of wak’a goes far beyond rocks; the latter only constitute a subgroup of wak’asand the foregrounded/sculpted boulders in the pattern only make up a small groupof all rock wak’as.

There may have been another interesting link between the foregrounded rocksin our pattern, usnus, and Inka origin places. There were two main Inka origin sto-ries told with certain variations by many chroniclers, which have been extensivelydebated in the literature (see, for example, Christie 2006b; Christie and Staller 2004;Salles-Reese 1997; Urton 1990, 1999). In the cosmic origin myth, Wiraqocha createdthe sun, the moon, and the stars on the Island of the Sun in Lake Titicaca. They aresaid to have come forth from two pronounced natural holes in a sacred rock outcrop.

190 JLACA 12 . 1

This rock outcrop was the focal point of an important Inka sanctuary which peo-ple from all parts of the Andes visited in annual pilgrimages. Next Wiraqochaformed humans and painted them in the manner of the dress they were supposedto wear. He sent his newly created people away underground to wait for his call tocome up out of springs, caves, rocks, and other similar places. Such places calledpacarinas became the unique locations of origin of individual lineages. In the spe-cific Inka origin myth, there was an important place with the name Pacariqtambo,to the south of Cusco, with a nearby mountain called Tampu T’oqo which displayedthree windows or caves. The ancestors of the Inka who are represented as fourbrothers and four sisters in the chronicles emerged from the central window. TampuT’oqo is known today as the sculpted outcrop Pumaurqu. Pumaurqu is a giganticoutcrop associated with caves, carved boulders, and a few modest Inka buildingsaround its bottom. Its top surface is sculpted into seats, platforms, and planes, aswell as two pumas. The leader and principal figure among the ancestors was brotherAyar Manqo. They left Tampu T’oqo together with local people from the areasearching for fertile land on which they would settle. When they arrived at the val-ley of Cusco, they recognized through miraculous signs that this should be theirhome. They took possession of it and Ayar Manqo founded the capital and becamethe first Inka ruler Manqo Qhapaq.

This digression was necessary to show how important stone and rocks—carvedas well as uncarved—were in Inka and pan-Andean origin mythology. There mayhave been a conceptual link between the rocks in the origin stories, usnus, and theforegrounded rocks in the pattern we are investigating. Betanzos and Pedro Pizarro(1978:91) clearly say that one aspect of the usnu in the principal plaza of Cusco wasthat it functioned as a seat of the sun. Meddens (1997:10), in his discussion of usnus,differentiates between one type of usnu that was the seat of the sun and another typewhich was the seat of the ruler. He (1997:10) further points out that Inka rulers aswell as the sun could literally be represented by certain idols which were understoodas their brother images or huauques (wauq’es). Such huauques were mentioned bySpanish writers and specific huauques of Inka rulers have been identified (Van deGuchte 1996). Andean people appear to have believed that the spirit and essence ofthe ruler entered his brother or double image. The idol Punchaw stationed in theQorikancha seems to have represented the sun in a similar way. At the beginning oftime, when the sun first came out of the opening in the large rock formation on theIsland of the Sun, it rested or sat on the stone for a moment in time. Perhaps the sunwas made to rest or sit in a similar fashion on the usnu in Cusco when the Inka peo-ple placed the idol of the Sun on it (see above Betanzos 1996:48). This ritual act maybe understood as an attempt to re-create the origin place in the center of Cusco. Themain message of this ritual was to center the sun and its origin in Cusco. Since theInka ruler was respected as the son of the sun, it would be appropriate for both the

ruler and its supernatural father, to occupy equal usnus (see the two carved seatsat Vilcaswaman). It is very interesting that Ramos Gavilan as well as BernabeCobo (cited by Bauer and Stanish 2001:230–231) mention a large stone basinplaced directly in front of the Sacred Rock on the Island of the Sun into whichpriests poured the corn beer or chicha for the Sun to drink. Bauer’s and Stanish’excavations (2001:231) exposed the remains of a stone canal which drained liq-uids away from the Sacred Rock. This seems to indicate that those aspects of theusnu which deal with liquid offerings and drainage were present in the Sanctu-ary area and that the Island of the Sun had—at least conceptually—an usnu.According to Zuidema (1980:357), this very aspect of an opening in the ground,where the earth absorbs rain water and other liquids, is the central theme of theInka usnu.

An implicit connection with the origin place Pumaurqu may have been estab-lished by Thupa Inka through his carved rock in Chinchero which exhibits seats andplatforms as well as two puma figures. Thupa Inka may have envisioned to symbol-ically transfer the origin site of the Inka dynasty to his personal estate.

The Use of the Pattern by Individual Emperors

In Inka Studies, it is often considered a risky endeavor to attribute specific settle-ments, buildings, or even masonry and ceramic styles to individual emperorsbecause the accounts of the Spanish writers are not consistent and archaeologicaldata are often inconclusive (D’Altroy 2002:45–47, 53–55, 109; Meyers 1997). Never-theless, based upon the broad consensus in the chronicles that Pachakuti redesignedCusco as the capital of the Inka empire and the documentary evidence whichattributes the royal estates discussed above to specific rulers, I will dare to link cer-tain consistencies and changes within the pattern to the preferences of individualemperors.

As discussed above, the archetypal model of the pattern plaza-kallanka-foregrounded/carved rock originated in Cusco. I have treated this pattern as if itwas formed in the course of Pachakuti’s reconstruction of the capital although it isimpossible to say what exactly the Cusco usnu looked like and when exactly it wasbuilt given the available data. Wiraqocha Inka created a basic copy at his estate ofJuchuy Qosqo by integrating the large sandstone boulder in between the plaza,kallanka, and palace complex. Pachakuti commissioned the carving of rocks(Christie N.d., 2003b) and his examples of the pattern in Machu Picchu and Vitcosdisplay finely sculpted boulders. Amaru Thupa Inka’s estate at Callachaca exhibitsanother case of our pattern including an outcrop that has few carvings whileThupa Inka seems to have followed the elaborate sculptural style of his father.

192 JLACA 12 . 1

At his royal estate at Chinchero, he created an impressive group of sculpture, archi-tecture, and open space designed around a carved outcrop. The seat-like carvingscharged this outcrop with concepts of an usnu and the sculpted pumas harkenedback to the Inka origin place Pumaurqu, thus transforming the outcrop into a for-midable seat of power. Wayna Qhapaq used the pattern in his palace complex ofQuispiguanca at Urubamba and Yucay. The foregrounded rock is a white uncarvedboulder centrally displayed. These chronological comparisons may suggest that thepattern was employed in its most elaborate forms during the reigns of Pachakutiand Thupa Inka. I have presented evidence elsewhere (Christie N.d., 2003b), thatPachakuti in particular promoted the carving of rocks and that Thupa Inka main-tained this same strategy. This reasoning extends to Samaipata, which was foundedduring the reigns of these two monarchs and/or Wayna Qhapaq’s. The case ofSamaipata is truly unique and based on its formidable geological conditions: agiant outcrop towering above the plaza with kallanka. The great variety of carvingsimply numerous religious ritual and political functions. Other governance sites atgreat distances from Cusco, such as Inkallaqta and Huanuco Pampa, exhibit plat-form usnus instead of foregrounded rocks. At Vilcabamba the Old, the pattern issimple and reduced, using a large unmodified boulder. However, given the loca-tion of Vilcabamba the Old in the lowland jungle where mountain peaks are non-existent and the symbolic qualities of the apus and stone perhaps poorlyunderstood, the prominence of the huge boulder standing next to the kallanka isno less conspicuous.

This brief rerun of the examples discussed earlier was meant to bring out theindividual nature of each case study. While there was the general overarching pat-tern, each occurrence is unique and perhaps personal in the way it was interpretedand manipulated by specific rulers. Other examples are the result of an adaptationto geologic conditions, such as Samaipata and to some extent Callachaca. I believeour pattern speaks to the individuality and artistic creativity of Inka rulers and arti-sans in the way they adapted a specific design to local land formations and chang-ing political contexts. This is why it has been so challenging and difficult to defineclear models and patterns in Inka culture in general. For example, scholars havebeen unable to agree on issues such as what are the identifying features of an Inkapalace or royal estate architecture or patterns and meaning of Inka urban design(see Christie 2006a; Hyslop 1990; Kendall 1985; Morris 2004a, 2004b; Protzen 2000).Perhaps we should concentrate more on the individuality of Inka design, approachcase studies from a local context, and from the local direction find the point atwhich individuality and personal interpretation was balanced and counteracted bystate control. It is this often subtle interplay and balancing act between local expres-sion and state power, the very principle of reciprocity or ayni, that makes the studyof Inka culture so fascinating.

Conclusions

The examples analyzed above have demonstrated that the combination of architec-tural and sculptural/natural features plaza-kallanka-foregrounded rock forms arecurring pattern. In some cases, the special rock had the form of an usnu with aseating area and thus functioned as a place where the ruler appeared in a prominentand elevated position. Guaman Poma de Ayala (1987:391, 407, 377) representedAtawallpa and Manqo Inka seated on usnus in Cajamarca and Cusco as well as astepped platform as part of an architectural setting in a scene during the reign ofWayna Qhapaq (Figure 13). In these three drawings, the usnu is a stepped pyrami-dal stone with four platforms, but it is by no means certain that this was the histor-ically correct form of the Cusco usnu. The carved rocks at Chinchero, MachuPicchu, and Vilcaswaman may have been used as similar royal thrones. Yet, such acontext does not explain the entire pattern since other cases, for example,Quispiguanca and Vilcabamba were not carved as seats. What linked all the fore-grounded rocks in the pattern together was that they were wak’as and consisted ofstone and the symbolic qualities associated with it.

Finally, relationships of the highest order may have been called up by the rocksand boulders in our pattern. The examples discussed include Cusco, the capital, fiveroyal estates: Juchuy Qosqo, Machu Picchu, Chinchero, Callachaca, Quispiguanca,the outlying governance sites of Samaipata, Inkallaqta, Huanuco Pampa, and Vilcaswaman as well as the new capital in exile Vilcabamba. One fundamental con-cept that qualified Cusco as the capital and elevated it to the center of the empirewas that the division of the four quarters of Tawantinsuyu originated from its mainplaza Awkaypata. More specifically, Zuidema (1980:326) interprets Molina’s descrip-tion of the citua festival in the way that the four-partite division indeed began at theusnu. The document of the visit by Damian de la Bandera in the valley of Yucay in1558 states that this valley was the personal property of Wayna Qhapaq (“como reca-mara suya”—like his private room) and that therefore the Indians who lived theredid not belong to any suyu (Villanueva Urteaga 1971:94). Witnesses Lucas Chico andMartin Cutipa, mitimaes from the Yucay Valley, confirmed that neither this valleynor Wayna Qhapaq’s properties were ever part of any of the four provinces intowhich the empire was divided (Villanueva Urteaga 1971:129–131). For Damian de laBandera, this was important because yanaconas and camayos traditionally main-tained and worked the personal estates of the ruler and were thus exempt from trib-ute to the state and de la Bandera wanted to change that by taxing them. In thecontext of this study, it establishes an intriguing political parallel between Cuscoand the royal estates: they all may have been considered neutral spaces, types ofcenters, and certain origin places. The division of the four quarters started inAwkaypata and possibly at the Cusco usnu itself. I suggest that the pattern of

194 JLACA 12 . 1

plaza-kallanka-foregrounded rock at the royal estates evoked similar ideas. Whileplazas and kallankas generally have practical functions, the special rocks are clearlythe most powerfully charged feature in the pattern. As discussed elsewhere (ChristieN.d., 2003a, 2003b; Niles 1992), on the most basic level, stone and rocks have thesymbolic quality of mediating between the underworld (ukhu pacha), the world ofman (kay pacha), and the upper world (hanan pacha) because bedrock reaches deepinside the earth and stone in the form of the Andean mountains towers high abovethe human world in the realm of the apus or mountain deities. Some of the steppedcarvings may reproduce the man-made terraces on the mountain slopes. But I thinkin the context of royal estates, the rocks in the pattern may have another level ofmeaning beyond their functions as seats/thrones and mediators between the verti-cal divisions of the cosmos. Going back to the discussion of wak’as above, these spe-cial boulders and sculpted rocks may call up different states of being and meaningswhich we as Westerners understand as disparate but which in the mind of Andeanpeople were related. It should be recalled that Salomon (Salomon and Urioste1991:19) recognizes clear correspondences between the organization of wak’as andhuman social structure. I speculate to summarize such interrelations as follows:Cusco-ruler-center-plaza and kallankas for people-stone usnu-libations for ukhupacha, offerings to hanan pacha-royal estates-ruler-plaza and kallankas for people-stone wak’as. I think the administrative centers with usnu platforms covered abovemay be included even though the symbolic associations presented here apply mostdirectly to stone wak’as and only in a secondary sense to usnu platforms. Ritual inthe plazas, kallankas, and at the stones brought these interrelations alive throughperformance and acted them out. I argue that the pattern articulated formal, ideo-logical, and conceptual parallels with Cusco, the center—a link that underlined thehigh status of royal estates as well as of any other settlement using the pattern. Theseassociations would have been most appropriate and even necessary for Vilcabamba,which Manqo Inka pronounced the new capital.

Thus the discussion has demonstrated that the pattern of a plaza-kallanka-foregrounded rock in Inka settlements was indeed meaningful. It brought upnumerous ideas about Inka political power grounded in cosmology since some ofthe sculpted and foregrounded rocks display features of an usnu and all of them fallinto the category of wak’as charged with powerful animating essences. The greatvariety of contexts and ideas which could be brought up by the special rocks had tobe dramatized and explained in rituals conducted in the plaza and kallanka. Throughritual performances most likely led and presided over by the Inka ruler, ambiguitieswith regard to worldview were cleared away and order was instituted. While not allof the occurrences of the pattern are identical in their material form—they may varyin layout, elements of an usnu, distances between the diagnostic features, and elabo-ration of the rocks—, they evoked similar concepts and thought structures.

Acknowledgments

I would like to express my thanks and gratitude to Dr. Jean Muteba Rahier, Editorof JLACA and to his Managing Editor, Christi Navarro, as well as to the anonymousreviewers who helped me with inexhaustible commitment to improve my manu-script and make it acceptable to JLACA’s readers. I also thank Kelly Adams at EastCarolina University for digitally altering many of my images and for her greatpatience and reliability.

References Cited

Alcina Franch, Jose

1976 Arqueologia de Chinchero. 1: La Arquitectura. Madrid: Mision Cientifica

Espanola en Hispanoamerica II, Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores.

Allen, Catherine

1998 When Utensils Revolt: Mind, Matter, and Modes of Being in the Pre-Columbian

Andes. RES 33:18–27.

Angles Vargas, Victor

1988 Historia del Cusco Incaico. Vol. I and II. Lima: Industrial Gráfica S.A.

Bauer, Brian

1992 The Development of the Inca State. Austin: University of Texas Press.

2004 Ancient Cuzco. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Bauer, Brian and David Dearborn

1995 Astronomy and Empire in the Ancient Andes. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Bauer, Brian and Charles Stanish

2001 Ritual and Pilgrimage in the Ancient Andes. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Betanzos, Juan de

1996 [1557] Narrative of the Incas. Roland Hamilton and Dana Buchanan, eds. Austin:

University of Texas Press.

Christie, Jessica

2003a The Sacred Inca Rocks of Sayhuite. In Rock Art Papers. vol.16. Ken Hedges, ed.

Pp.133–142. San Diego: San Diego Museum Papers 41. Museum of Man.

2003b The Carved Rocks of Machu Picchu. Paper presented at the Rock Art 2003 Con-

ference organized by the Museum of Man, San Diego.

2006a Houses of Political Power among the Ancient Maya and Inka. In Palaces and

Power in the Americas: From Peru to the Northwest Coast. Jessica Christie and

Patricia Sarro, eds. Pp. 353–396. University of Texas Press, Austin.

2006b Inca Copacabana: A Reconstruction from the Perspective of the Carved Rocks.

Anthropos 101:179–201.

N.d. The Sculpted Outcrops of the Inka. University of Texas Press, Austin.

Christie, Jessica and John Staller

2004 Inka Pacariqtambo: It Depends which Eyes are Looking at it. Paper presented in

the session Landscapes of Origin in the Americas organized and co-chaired by

196 JLACA 12 . 1

Christie and Staller at the annual Conference of the American Anthropological

Association in Atlanta.

Cieza de León, Pedro de

1959 [1553] The Incas.Victor Wolfgang von Hagen, ed. Norman, OK: University of

Oklahoma Press.

Cornejo Bouroncle, Jorge

1946 Huakaypata: La Plaza Mayor del Viejo Cuzco. Cuzco: Revista Universitaria:

86–116.

D’Altroy, Terence

2002 The Incas. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

Dean, Carolyn

2006 Rethinking Apachetas in Light of Murua’s Galvin Manuscript. Paper presented at

the 46th Annual Meeting of the Institute of Andean Studies, Berkeley, California.

Dearborn, David

2000 The Inca Rulers of the Andes, Children of the Sun. In Astronomy Across Cultures:

The History of Non-Western Astronomy. Helaine Selin and Xiaochun Sun, eds.

Pp. 197–224. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Garcilaso de la Vega, Inca

1963 [1605] Comentarios Reales de los Incas. Carmelo Saenz de Santa Maria, ed.

Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Espanoles.

Gasparini, Graciano and Luise Margolies

1980 Inca Architecture. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Guaman (Huaman) Poma de Ayala, Felipe

1987 [1615] Nueva cronica y buen gobierno. John Murra, Rolena Adorno, and Jorge

Urioste, eds. Madrid: Historia 16.

Hyslop, John

1990 Inka Settlement Planning. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Isbell, William

2006 Landscape of Power: A Network of Palaces in Middle Horizon Peru, in

Palaces and Power in the Americas: From Peru to the Northwest COSAT. Jes-

sica Christie and Patricia Sarro, eds. Pp. 44–98. Austin: University of Texas

Press.

Jimenez de la Espada, Don Marcos

1965 [1881–1897] Relaciones Geograficas de Indias: Peru. Jose Urbano Martinez Car-

reras, ed. Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Espanoles.

Kendall, Ann

1985 Aspects of Inca Architecture: Description, Function, and Chronology. London:

BAR International Series 242.

Kendall, Ann, Rob Early, and Bill Sillar

1992 Report on Archaeological Field Season Investigating Early Inca Architecture at

Juchuy Coscco (Q’aqya Qhawana) and Warq’ana, Province of Calca, Dept. of

Cuzco, Peru. In Ancient America. Contributions to New World Archaeology.

Nicholas Saunders, ed. Pp. 189–255. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxbow Mono-

graph 24, Oxbow Books,.

Lee, Vincent

2000 Forgotten Vilcabamba. Cortez, Colorado: Sixpac Manco Publications.

Legnani, Nicole Delia, ed.

2005 [1570] Titu Cusi Yupangui: A 16th Century Account of the Conquest. Cambridge:

Harvard University Press.

Meddens, F.M.

1997 Function and Meaning of the Usnu in Late Horizon Peru. Tawantinsuyu 3:5–14.

Meyers, Albert

1997 Towards a re-conceptualization of the Late Horizon and the Inka Periods: Per-

spectives from Cochasqui/Ecuador and Samaipata/Bolivia. Paper presented at

the Dumbarton Oaks Conference on Variations in the Expression of Inka Power.

Washington, D.C.

1998 Las Campanas Arqueologicas en Samaipata, 1994–1996. Segundo Informe de

Trabajo. Sociedad de Investigacion del Arte Rupestre de Bolivia (SIARB), Boletin

12:59–86. La Paz.

Meyers, Albert and Cornelius Ulbert

1997 Inka Archaeology in Eastern Bolivia: Some Aspects of the Samaipata Project.

Tawantinsuyu 3:79–85.

Morris, Craig

2004a Enclosures of Power: The Multiple Spaces of Inca Administrative Palaces. In

Palaces of the Ancient World. Susan Toby Evans and Joanne Pillsbury, eds. Pp.

299–323. Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection.

2004b The Architecture of Tahuantinsuyo. In The Incas: Art and Symbols. Franklin

Pease, Craig Morris, Julian Santillana, Ramiro Matos, Paloma Carcedo/Luisa

Vetter, Carmen Arellano, Lucy Salazar/Vuka Roussakis, eds. Pp. 1–59. Lima:

Banco de Credito del Peru.

Morris, Craig and Donald Thompson

1985 Huanuco Pampa: An Inca City and its Hinterland. New Cork: Thames & Hudson.

Niles, Susan

1987 Callachaca. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.

1992 Inca Architecture and the Sacred Landscape. In The Ancient Americas: Art from

Sacred Landscapes. Richard Townsend, ed. Pp. 346–357. Chicago: The Art

Institute of Chicago.

1999 The Shape of Inca History. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.

Paternosto, Cesar

1996 The Stone and the Thread. Andean Roots of Abstract Art. Austin: University of

Texas Press.

Protzen, Jean-Pierre

1993 Inca Architecture and Construction at Ollantaytambo. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

2000 Inca Architecture. In The Inca World. The Development of Pre-Columbian Peru,

A.D. 1000–1534. Laura Laurencich Minelli, ed. Pp. 193–217. Norman, OK: University

of Oklahoma Press.

198 JLACA 12 . 1

Rostworowski de Diez Canseco, Maria

1983 Estructuras Andinas del Poder. Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.

1999 History of the Inca Realm. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.

Rowe, John

1967 What kind of settlement was Inca Cusco? Nawpa Pacha 5:59–75.

1990 El plano mas antiguo del Cuzco. Historica 24(2):367–377.

Salazar, Lucy C.

2004 Machu Picchu: Mysterious Royal Estate in the Cloud Forest. In Machu Picchu:

Unveiling the Mystery of the Incas. Richard Burger and Lucy Salazar, eds. Pp.

21–47. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Salles-Reese, Veronica

1997 From Viracocha to the Virgin of Copacabana. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Salomon, Frank

1998 How the huacas were: the language of substance and transformation in the

Huarochiri Quechua manuscript. RES 33:7–17.

Salomon Frank and George Urioste, eds.

1991 The Huarochiri Manuscript. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Staller, John

N.d. Dimensions of Place: The Significance of Centers to the Development of Andean

Civilization.

Stone-Miller, Rebecca

2002 Art of the Andes from Chavin to Inca. London: Thames & Hudson.

Urton, Gary

1990 The History of a Myth. Pacariqtambo and the Origin of the Inkas. Austin:

University of Texas Press.

1999 Inca Myths. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Van de Guchte, Maarten

1990 Carving the World: Inca Monumental Sculpture and Landscape. Unpublished

Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois at

Urbana-Champaign. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.

1996 Sculpture and the Concept of the Double among the Inca Kings. RES

29/30:256–268.

Villanueva Urteaga, Horacio

1971 Documentos sobre Yucay en el Siglo XVI. Revista del Archivo Historico del

Cuzco, no.13, 1970, 1–148, Cuzco.

Wright, Ruth and Alfredo Valencia Zegarra

2001 The Machu Picchu Guide Book. Boulder: Johnson Books.

Zuidema, Tom

1980 El Ushnu. Revista de la Universidad Complutense 28:317–362.

Did The Inka Copy Cusco? An Answer Derived From an Architectural-Sculptural Model

Documents