« Arqueología »

Arqueología, Perú Arqueología, Perú Arqueología, Perú Arqueología, Perú



    Conclusions

    Archaeological, linguistic, and ethnohistoric data provide more evidence of a longterm shared tradition between Huamachuco and Conchucos than between Huamachuco and Cajamarca. The shared features, however, were not developed to the point that perduring and politically unified ethnic groups can be identified. Instead, as Pease (1982) suggests, there was a complex system of interrelationships that operated at different times and levels of integration; we can recognize attributes, like language, religion, and style, that might be used to define ethnic groups, but the boundaries between the groups are vague and the degree of cohesion fluctuates.

    The Inca administration manipulated ethnicity, at least in the Huamachuco area. They split closely related groups, like Huamachuco and Conchucos, into different administrative units. They modified the guaranga groupings within the resulting provinces. Chaupiyungas groups, defined mythically as enemies, were appended to the unit. They then lumped Huamachuco together with less related groups, such as Cajamarca and even Guambos, to form a larger administrative unit and they used mitmaq policy to create a "spurious ethnicity" (cf. Gailey 1987) to support their administra-tive restructuring.

    There are conclusions to be drawn on sev-eral levels:

    1. Theoretically. In the case of Hua-machuco, ethnic identity was imposed from above rather than developing out of a process of indigenous resistance to the Inca state. If, in fact, at the time of the Spanish conquest the people of Cajamarca and Huamachuco spoke the same language (Cieza 1984 [1553]), dressed the same (ibid.; Pizarro 1978 [1571]), and shared Catequil as a principal huaca (Sarmiento 1907 [1572]; Albomoz 1967 [ca. 1582]), it would be a demonstration that ethnicity had been extremely manipulated by the state. I suspect, though, that the people of Cajamarca and Huamachuco still preserved more elements of distinctiveness than the chroniclers suggest and that there are other explanations for the similarities observed: that perhaps they were beginning to speak a shared dia-lect ofQuechua as Torero (1989) sug-gests and that the shared aspects of religion and dress were overly simplified glosses on the part of the Spanish.

    2. Methodologically. The information presented here suggests that we cannot assume that any level of the Inca administrative hierarchy corresponds to an indigenous ethnic group. This means, moreover, that we cannot use lists of Inca provinces or encomienda grants as a shortcut to the reconstruction of Late Intermediate Period polities and social groupings. On the other hand, the example presented here should encourage us to use archaeological and documentary information in a complementary way to study the impact of the Inca administration on indigenous perceptions of self.

    3. Functionally. Even though imposed and artificial, the Inca promotion of ethnicity served the needs of the indigenous groups as well as the goals of the Inca overlords; this is why Inca policy was successful. The local people gained increased access to different ecological zones, averaging of risk over larger areas and populations, and participation in a wider social uni-verse. Local elites had their status confirmed and authority legitimated. The Inca gained an administrative tool that appeared to honor, indeed enforce, local tradition, while in fact allowing them to make major structural changes.

    Acknowledgments

    Archaeological research in Huamachuco was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and authorized by the Institute Nacional de Cultura. The research was codirected by Theresa Lange Topic. This paper has benefited greatly from participation at a Dumbarton Oaks summer seminar that allowed me to read widely and discuss these ideas with the other participants: John V. Murra, Franklin Pease G. Y., Charles Hastings, and Inge Schjellerup; I thank both Dumbarton Oaks and the participants in the seminar. John H. Rowe and Maria Rostworowski have also always been very generous in providing advice and insight on matters of Inca ethnohistory. Dan Julien, Luis Millones, and two anonymous reviewers provided very useful comments during the review process. At Trent I would like to thank Lisa Rankin and the late Otto Roesch for advice and comments. Theresa Lange Topic has played a critical role in the preparation of this paper.




    Retornar Avanzar