ABSTRACT

Name: Allen M. Rutherford Department: Anthropology

Title: Space and Landscape in the Norte Chico Region, Peru: An Analysis of Socio-
Political Organization through Monumental Architecture

Major: Anthropology Degree: Master of Arts

Approved by: Date:

___________________________ _________________________
Thesis Director

NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY

 ABSTRACT

The Norte Chico region in Peru has become the locus of debate recently for

understanding the origins and development of socio-political organization and

complexity in the Andes. Continuing research with a focus on radiocarbon dating

has shown that there is a possibility for contemporaneous occupation at several sites

in the region. Assuming contemporaneous occupation, this research will investigate

the likelihood of a pristine state in the region as well as an opposing hypothesis that

the region fits Renfrew’s (1986) model for peer-polity interaction. Two analyses

will be conducted, on the individual site level a spatial syntax analysis will be

applied to eleven multi-mound sites in the region with Late Archaic dates and at the

regional level hypothetical territorial boundaries will be examined through the

construction of Thiessen polygons using Geographic Information Systems (GIS).

Spatial syntax analysis provides a simplified quantification of site organization that

can establish a pattern of organization. Quantified values will provide the basis for

a comparison of the individual sites from which territorial boundaries can be

constructed. It is expected that the sites in the region will follow a pattern that is

consistent with a peer-polity model where all of the sites share a similar pattern of

organization as well as equal areas of territorial influence.

Certification: In accordance with the departmental and Graduate

School policies, this thesis is accepted in partial

fulfillment of degree requirements

_________________________________________
Thesis Director

_________________________________________
Date
 NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY

SPACE AND LANDSCAPE IN THE NORTE CHICO REGION, PERU: AN

ANALYSIS OF SOCIO-POLITICAL ORGANIZATION THROUGH

MONUMENTAL ARCHITECTURE

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR THE DEGREE

MASTER OF ARTS

DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY

BY

ALLEN M. RUTHERFORD

©2008 Allen M. Rutherford

DEKALB, ILLINOIS

MAY 2008
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would first like to thank my advisor, Dr. Winifred Creamer, for providing

me with the opportunity to work with Proyecto Arqueologico Norte Chico and for

patiently listening and advising me not only with my research but also with my plans

for the future. I would also like to thank Dr. Jonathan Haas without whose brain-

storming sessions with me I might never have been able to find a clear plan with

which to focus my research interests. I would like to thank the third member of my

committee, Dr. Michael Kolb, for listening and putting things into perspective for a

generally stressed out graduate student.

All of the faculty in the Anthropology Department, especially Dr. Dan Gebo

and our wonderful secretaries, Kathy Truman and Ruth Chaplin, I am thankful that I

was given the opportunity to attend Northern Illinois University and Dr. Gebo, Kathy,

and Ruth made the journey a little easier.

A special thanks goes to the employees in the Anthropology Department at the

Field Museum and especially Kaelyn Dillard in the lab of the Americas for allowing

me to invade their spaces and for taking time out of their day to help me. Half of my

research would have never been conducted were it not for Kaelyn’s patience and GIS

knowledge.

The Archaeological Institute of America and the Center for Latino and Latin

American Studies at Northern Illinois University made the research I conducted in the
 iv
2007 field season possible through the Jane C. Waldbaum Field School Grant and

the Graduate Research Award. I would also like to thank the Graduate School at

Northern Illinois for providing a travel grant so that I could present my findings at the

Midwest Conference for Andean and Amazonian Archaeology and Ethnography.

Finally, I would like to thank everyone associated with PANC for their hospitality,

encouragement, and all of the best Peruvian food one person could ever hope for.
 DEDICATION

To Meemaw, Ma, Mom, Ginger, and Faith, the five of

you taught me everything I will ever need to know
about love, perseverance, and how to live each day
with eyes wide open to each new possibility
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii

LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x

Chapter

1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2. MONUMENTAL ARCHITECTURE AND SOCIAL

COMPLEXITY IN THE LATE
ARCHAIC ANDES . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Theoretical Perspectives . . . . . . . . . 14

3. THEORY FOR SPATIAL SYNTAX ANALYSIS AND

ARCHAEOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS . . . . . . 32

4. SITE DESCRIPTIONS AND SPACE SYNTAX

ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Supe Valley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Pativilca Valley . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Fortaleza Valley . . . . . . . . . . . 60

Results from Space Syntax Analysis . . . . . 66

5. REGIONAL ANALYSIS USING THIESSEN

POLYGONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

Supe Valley . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

Pativilca Valley . . . . . . . . . . 80
 vii
Chapter Page

Fortaleza Valley . . . . . . . . . . . 82

6. INTERPRETATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . 95

Space Syntax, Socio-Political Organization and

the Archaeological Record . . . . . . . . 102

Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . 110

Thoughts for Further Research . . . . . . . 111

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

APPENDIX: SITE MAPS . . . . . . . . . . . . 120

 LIST OF TABLES

Tables Page

4.1. Supe Valley space syntax values from Shady and Leyva’s maps . . 67

4.2. Supe Valley space syntax values from Zechenter’s maps . . . . . . 67

4.3. Supe Valley average space syntax values . . . . . . . . . . . 68

4.4. Pativilca Valley space syntax values . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

4.5. Fortaleza Valley space syntax values . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

4.6. Space syntax values for all Category 1 sites . . . . . . . . . . 70

4.7. Space syntax values for all Category 2 sites . . . . . . . . . . 71

4.8. Space syntax values for all Category 3 sites . . . . . . . . . . 71

5.1. Supe Valley idealized Thiessen polygon values for all Late Archaic
sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

5.2. Supe Valley arable land Thiessen polygon values for all Late Archaic
sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

5.3. Supe Valley arable land Thiessen polygon values for Category 1
sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

5.4. Pativilca Valley idealized Thiessen polygon values for all Late Archaic
sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

5.5. Pativilca Valley arable land Thiessen polygon values for all Late
Archaic sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

5.6. Pativilca Valley arable land Thiessen polygon values for Category 1
sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

5.7. Fortaleza Valley arable land Thiessen polygon values for all Late
Archaic sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
 ix
Table Page

5.8. Fortaleza Valley arable land Thiessen polygon values for

all Late Archaic sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

5.9. Fortaleza Valley arable land Thiessen polygon values for

Category 1 sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

5.10. Division of arable land among all Category 1 sites in the region . . . 93

6.1. Comparison of average calibrated radiocarbon dates

from all Category 1 and Category 2 and 3 sites in the region . . . . . 108
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1-1. Graphical representation of access patterns: symmetry,

asymmetry, distributedness, and nondistributedness . . . . . . 6

2-1. Plan of walls at Huaca de los Idolos, Aspero with an

arrow indicating room 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

2-2. Site plan of El Paraiso with an arrow indicating Unit I . . . . . 20

2-3. Floor plan of Unit I at El Paraiso . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

2-4. Floor 30, La Galgada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

2-5. Site plan of Caral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

2-6. The Great Pyramid at Caral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

2-7. The Temple of the Amphitheater at Caral . . . . . . . . . 25

5-1. Idealized territorial boundaries for all Late Archaic sites

in the Norte Chico region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

5-2. Supe Valley idealized territorial boundaries for all Late Archaic
sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

5-3. Idealized territorial boundaries for all Category 1 sites in the

Norte Chico region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

5-4. Supe Valley idealized territorial boundaries for Category 1

sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

5-5. Supe Valley arable land boundaries for all Late Archaic sites . . 78

5-6. Supe Valley arable land boundaries for Category 1 sites . . . . 79

5-7. Pativilca Valley idealized territorial boundaries for all Late

Archaic sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
 xi
Figure Page

5-8. Pativilca Valley idealized territorial boundaries for Category 1

sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

5-9. Pativilca Valley arable land boundaries for all Late Archaic
sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

5-10. Pativilca Valley arable land boundaries for Category 1 sites . . 86

5-11. Fortaleza Valley idealized territorial boundaries for all Late

Archaic sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

5-12. Fortaleza Valley idealized territorial boundaries for Category

1 sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

5-13. Fortaleza Valley arable land boundaries for all Late Archaic
sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

5-14. Fortaleza Valley arable land boundaries for Category 1 sites . . 90

 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, the Norte Chico region of Peru has become a focal point for

the study of early civilization in the Late Archaic Andes. Much of the interest in the

region is associated with the abundance of very large monumental architecture and

corresponding radiocarbon dates. The scale of these sites in conjunction with

radiocarbon dates ranging between 3000-1800 B.C. suggests the earliest forms of

hierarchical socio-political organization in the New World. Previous research in the

region has discussed socio-political organization in the context of monumentality,

size, and function of the architecture in the region. The development of the socio-

political dynamic in the region has also given rise to a debate as to the relationship

and competition between sites over coastal and inland subsistence resources. While

these debates continue to dominate the discussion for the origins of socio-political

development in the Norte Chico region during the Late Archaic period, patterns of

site organization and land distribution have been overlooked. A basic understanding

of each of these variables can be achieved through the combination of two basic

archaeological analyses; space syntax analysis (Hillier and Hanson 1984) and

Thiessen polygon analysis (Renfrew 1986).

 2
The space that humans occupy is controlled in many cases by the

architecture that surrounds them. In any large city control of space by the

surrounding architecture is readily evident. On a much smaller scale the mound

sites in the Norte Chico influenced the space occupied by residents of the sites as

well as the outsiders that visited the sites. An analysis of spatial organization will

provide the information needed to understand interactions between people, the

surrounding space, and the architecture that they constructed. The data will also

provide more insight into the discussion as to whether a regional pattern of site

organization exists and establish whether site hierarchies were present during the

Late Archaic period.

Helping to establish a regional pattern for spatial organization at the site

level only answers part of the questions being asked in this research. The

construction of Thiessen polygons based on the geographic site distribution of Late

Archaic sites in the Norte Chico region provides invaluable information concerning

centrality of sites, geographic relationships between sites, as well as location of sites

in relationship to important land resources.

The goals for the Norte Chico research center on three main hypotheses:

1) the Late Archaic monuments are not randomly distributed across the landscape

but have geographical relationships to one another

2) the pattern of spatial organization is equal at all sites and reflects the presence of

a social hierarchy at the individual site level and is consistent with a peer polity

model of socio-political organization

 3
3) division of land through Thiessen polygon analysis is equal and is consistent

with a peer polity model for socio-political organization

All of these hypotheses will be tested within the context of the

archaeological data already collected from the region (Shady et al. 2001; Shady and

Leyva 2003; Shady 2006; Haas et al. 2004; Haas and Creamer 2006; Creamer et al.

2006, 2007; Vega-Centeno 2005). For the purposes of this research, social

hierarchy is defined as the presence of class distinctions in the region at the end of

the Late Archaic period (ca. 2200-2000 B.C.) where a distinction is made between

high and low status groups of individuals. Within this hierarchical framework, the

peer polity model will be defined as a grouping of sites in the Norte Chico region

that are relatively equal in spatial organization at the site level and territorial

influence based on Thiessen polygon analysis at the regional level, the two basic

tenets of Renfrew’s (1986) theory for peer polity interaction.

The hypotheses will also be tested within a specific synchronic time frame

for the region, specifically between 2400 and 2000 B.C. The highest frequency of

radiocarbon dates from the region fall within this time span. This particular

research is being conducted with the understanding that what is occurring in the

Norte Chico region from 3000-1800 B.C. is a complex social dynamic with

continuous remodeling, reconstruction, and possible abandonment of the

monumental architectural sites. However, it is the feeling of this researcher that

these hypotheses can be tested and the conclusions can be framed with the

understanding that they will only provide a snapshot of the social dynamic in the

region that is occurring as the region is becoming more heavily populated and
 4
competition over land and people is becoming increasingly more complex and

focused.

Geography

The Norte Chico region lies between the central and north central coasts of

Peru. The region encompasses four river valleys starting with Huaura in the

southern part of the region and ending with Fortaleza in the northern part, with the

Supe and Pativilca valleys sitting in the central part of the region. The rivers start in

highland coastal Peru and flow westward into the Pacific Ocean. The region is

roughly 3500 sq. km with a relatively large expanse of barren desert land existing

between the two middle valleys, Pativilca to the north and Supe to the south. Lima

lies about 150 km south of the Huaura Valley and Trujillo is roughly 325 km north

of the Fortaleza Valley.

Methodology

This research is based on a two-step analysis for the Norte Chico region at

the end of the Late Archaic period. The first step will be to apply Hillier and

Hanson’s (1984) space syntax analysis to every site with a Late Archaic radiocarbon

date in the Norte Chico region to establish a pattern of spatial organization at the

individual site level as well as to assess the likelihood of the presence of social

hierarchy through architectural analysis. The second step will be to apply a

Thiessen polygon analysis (Renfrew 1986) to the region using the spatial patterns

garnered from the space syntax analysis to rank the sites in the region from likeliest
 5
to be a power center to least likely. The Thiessen polygon analysis will then

establish geographical relationships between the ranked sites providing a possible

pattern of land distribution regionally. The following sections reflect the order in

which the analyses will be conducted.

Space Syntax Analysis

Spatial syntax analysis provides an avenue by which the most complex

spaces can be reduced to their simplest forms in order to determine the changes in

social complexity that are reflected by the changes in space (Hillier and Hanson

1984; Shapiro 1997). The most pertinent variable garnered from a spatial syntax

analysis for this research is site permeability. The permeability, or ease with which

one may enter and move around in a site, is based on four properties: symmetry,

asymmetry, distributedness, and nondistributedness (Fig. 1-1). The first two

properties are represented as values of relative asymmetry (RA) and the latter two

by values of relative ringiness (RR). These values and properties will be discussed

with more detail in the next section.

Alpha-analysis

Alpha-analysis is one part of space syntax analysis and is the “syntactic

analysis of settlements” that measures the amount of continuous open space in a

settlement and represents it graphically (Hillier and Hanson 1984). Using existing

site maps I will construct a convex space map that divides the open space at a site

into the least number of potential polygons in the open space at the site (Hillier and
 6
Hanson 1984; Stone 2000). Simplified, the convex space map does nothing more

than divide the site into continuous areas of open space. The polygons for

continuous open space must be constructed so that a straight line may pass through

it from any point to any other point without going outside of the polygon (Hillier

and Hanson 1984; Stone 2000). Once the open spaces at the site have been divided

into polygons, access maps and patterns of access can be created and measured.

All of the spaces within the site constitute the local space of the site and are

assigned depth values with regards to an outside or global space called carrier space

(Hillier and Hanson 1984). These relationships are illustrated in Figure 1-1. In each

diagram, c constitutes the carrier or global space and points a, b, and d represent the

local space within the rooms that are associated with the access patterns. As an

example of depth in relation to carrier space I will refer to the access pattern

Figure 1 – 1. Graphical representation of access patterns: symmetry, asymmetry,

distributedness, and nondistributedness (adapted from Hillier and
Hanson 1984; after Shapiro 1997).
 7
labeled symmetrical-distributed (Fig. 1-1). In this case the depth of a and b in

relation to an outside point c is 1 as it only takes one step from the outside point c to

reach both a and b. In the illustration labeled asymmetrical-nondistributed the depth

for a is 1 and the depth for b is 2 since one must walk through a to get to b. When

considering depth one can think of the layers of an onion. The first layer of the

onion would have a depth of 1, the second a depth of 2, and so on getting closer or

deeper to the center.

An understanding of the properties of depth allows one to begin to

understand the properties of symmetry, asymmetry, distributedness, and

nondistributedness. Symmetry and asymmetry describe accessibility relationships

which is a relationship between being highly accessible (symmetrical) or tending

towards isolation (asymmetrical) (Hillier and Hanson 1984; Shapiro 1997). When a

is to b as b is to a then the relationship is said to be symmetrical (Fig. 1-1). When a

and b are not on equal then the relationship is asymmetrical. One need only to think

about the blueprint of one’s own house. Upon entering the front door of a house

one generally enters a foyer, followed by a hallway, then a den area, and so on until

one gets to a master bedroom. If one can only enter the house from the front door

then the foyer is the most accessible room to an outside individual while the master

bedroom is the most isolated. In other words, the rooms become more isolated the

deeper one penetrates into the house.

Distributedness and nondistributedness are the variables that measure the

ease with which one can move within a structure (Hillier and Hanson 1984). A

structure that is distributed simply means that there is more than one way to reach
 8
point a and point b from an outside point c. A nondistributed structure is one in

which access to one point is restricted by another point, for instance, one must walk

through point a in order to get to point b. Again, it is useful to recall the example of

a house. In most houses there are multiple entryways into family spaces (e.g. living

rooms, dens, kitchens, dining rooms). The spatial plan of these rooms would be

considered distributed as one can most likely enter the living room from the kitchen,

the dining room, and the foyer for example. However, the master bedroom, or any

bedrooms for that matter, generally only have one point of entry so the spatial plan

for the bedrooms would be nondistributed.

The quantified measurement of symmetry and asymmetry is called relative

asymmetry (RA), which simply means the numerical value of structural accessibility

relative to the space and depth of a site (Hillier and Hanson 1984). The values for

relative asymmetry fall within a numerical range of 0 to 1 where 0 is the most

accessible (symmetrical) and 1 is the most isolated (asymmetrical). The two

variables that make up the equation for relative asymmetry are mean depth (MD)

and k (the total number of spaces within the structure garnered from the convex

space map).

RA = 2(MD – 1)
k–2

The value for MD is calculated by summing all of the assigned depth values in the

system and then dividing it by the total number of spaces in the system less the

carrier space. For instance, if there are 6 spaces in a system including the carrier

space (k = 6) and total depth equaled 15 then:

 9

MD = 15 = 3
6-1

so, in this example:

RA = 2(3 – 1) = 1
6-2

The quantified measure of distributedness of a structure is relative ringiness

(RR) which is the numerical value of ease of movement within a structure relative to

the spaces within a structure (Hillier and Hanson 1984). A ring on an access pattern

map signifies an ability to reach a point within a structure from more than one other

point and generally by being able to circumscribe numerous other points along the

way to the final destination. In other words, it is the ability to enter a house from

the front and back doors and reach the kitchen from two different directions. The

calculation for RR divides all of the rings from the access pattern map by 2k – 5.

Like relative asymmetry, the values for relative ringiness fall between 0 and 1.

However, a 0 RR value indicates a structure where movement is controlled

(nondistributed) and 1 indicates the greatest ease of movement within structure

(distributed). Structures with controlled access are expected to be nondistributed

and asymmetrical and the archaeological interpretation would be consistent with the

presence of class distinctions or social hierarchy (Hillier and Hanson 1984; Shapiro

1997).

The RA and RR values will be collected for each site in the region that has a

corresponding Late Archaic radiocarbon date. Depending on site orientation

 10
numerous carrier spaces may be tested for certain sites, however, many of the

sites have an intuitive entrance plan based on the U-shaped organization of the

overall site.

Thiessen Polygon analysis

For the purposes of this research the Thiessen polygon will be used as a tool

to understand socio-political organization and site interaction in the Norte Chico

region based on geographical location. Interpretation of the Thiessen polygons will

be based on Renfrew’s (1986) model for peer-polity interaction. In conjunction

with the data garnered from the space syntax analysis it is hoped that primary and

secondary complexes, as defined by Renfrew (1986), will become readily evident.

The initial polygon construction will take into account every site with

calibrated radiocarbon dates falling within the Late Archaic as defined by Haas and

Creamer (2006) as well as sites that have not been dated but share similar

architectural features to the dated sites (Bermejo, Cerro de la Cruz). Further

Thiessen polygons will be created using all of the sites in conjunction with the

arable land for each valley. Arable land will be determined through an examination

of aerial photos (SAN 1943) for the region following Zechenter’s method of

analysis. Simplified, Zechenter’s (1988) method includes land that would have

been within the limits of natural flood zones and discounts any modern arable land

that is irrigated by major irrigation canals. Several iterations of Thiessen polygons

will be constructed based on the findings from the space syntax analysis.
 11
Thiessen polygons will be constructed using an extension in ArcView that

uses the GPS points from each Late Archaic site in the region and theoretical

polygons that show the extent of the region to determine hypothetical geographic

boundaries for the points within a polygon. The idealized polygon will be

constructed with the Peruvian coastline as the western border and the Fortaleza and

Supe valleys as the northern and southern borders. The hypothetical eastern extent

of the region will follow the foothills of the Andes. The points will be GPS data

points collected at each Late Archaic site with monumental architecture in the

region taken from existing survey data collected from the Norte Chico region and

previous research (Shady 2006: Vega-Centeno 2005; Haas and Creamer 2006;

Perales 2007, personal communication).

Limitations in Analyses and Data

There are several different limitations to both the analyses being conducted

and the data being used. The sites under investigation are over 4500 years old in

some cases and have been subject to natural erosion, looting, and reoccupation.

Sites such as Porvenir have been heavily eroded due to El Niño events throughout

time as well as later period burials that now occupy the areas that were sunken

circular plazas. Caballete and Punta y Suela also show signs of natural erosion and

washouts on some of their mound structures.

Perhaps the greatest limitation is the present habitation of these sites. Many

of the sites (i.e. Upaca, Vinto Alto, Pampa San Jose) have modern houses and

animal corrals built on top of or around certain aspects of construction. A house sits
 12
on what was once a smaller mound facing the larger mound at Upaca and the

rocks from the main mound have been used to build houses in the area. One of the

mounds at Punta y Suela has a modern canal running around its base and the other

large mound has a small road running through it with an electrical line on top. The

most likely location for a sunken plaza at Vinto Alto is now occupied by a modern

cemetery and the plaza area for Huaricanga has become a modern stone quarry.

The loss of architecture through modern habitation most affects the Huaura

valley where there is now limited data for large-scale sites. The loss of certain types

of architecture and the destruction of sites leads to some obvious problems in an

analysis of space and architecture. The lack of material in the Huaura valley also

makes a peer polity analysis for the entire region difficult. It is out of the scope of

this research to make assumptions as to where sites are located in the Huaura valley

or to determine where specific architectural features may or may not have been at

the sites under analysis. The data coming from the Norte Chico region is so recent

that there may be other sites in the region that have not been identified yet.

However, the limitations of this research do not take away from its pertinence

because it could prove to be the first step in providing a framework for future

research in the region.

 CHAPTER 2

MONUMENTAL ARCHITECTURE AND SOCIAL COMPLEXITY IN THE

LATE ARCHAIC ANDES

The use of monumental architecture to describe social complexity in the Pre-

Columbian Andes has existed since Max Uhle (1925) and Julio C. Tello (1943,

1960) first began describing their findings to the public. Later theories about the

origins of Andean civilization in the Late Archaic and Formative periods centered

on excavations of two coastal monuments, Aspero and El Paraiso (Moseley and

Willey 1973; Moseley 1975, 1985, 1992; Feldman 1980, 1985; Quilter and Stocker

1983). The identification of some of the earliest monumental architecture in the

Andes on the central coast of Peru has led most scholars to believe that the central

coast was the geographic region that flourished the earliest and endured for more

than 3,000 years (Billman 2001).

Tello first hypothesized that Chavin de Huantar was the seat of power for a

large Andean state going so far as to apply the moniker “Mother Culture” to the

Chavin horizon (1943, 1960). Much of Tello’s (1943, 1960) hypothesis centered on

the combination of a florescence of the Chavin pottery style and the architectural

similarities shared by many of the coastal monuments (e.g., sunken plazas, U-

shaped organization, platform mounds, large square plazas). Later radiocarbon

dates and the discovery of an earlier form of pottery at Initial Period sites in addition
 14
to the discovery of large monuments that were aceramic refuted Tello’s initial

hypothesis (Rowe 1963). The following chapter will discuss three theoretical

perspectives (chiefdom, state, peer polity) for sociopolitical organization in the

Norte Chico region over the last thirty years as well as their application through

investigation of monumental architecture from the Late Archaic period. For a full

discussion of the history of archaeological work from the Late Archaic Peruvian

coast see Vega-Centeno (2005).

Theoretical Perspectives

Within the last thirty years three clear schools of thought about the socio-

political organization in the Norte Chico have emerged. The first is a chiefdom

model as defined by Service (1962) centering on excavations at Aspero on the

coastal plain of the Supe Valley (Feldman 1980; 1985; Moseley 1985, 1992). While

the chiefdom model has been refuted recently (Haas and Creamer 2006), it should

still be discussed as a foundation for the study of socio-political organization

through the study of monumental architecture in the Late Archaic and specifically

the Norte Chico region. Shady (Shady et al. 2003; Shady 2006) later contends that

Caral in the Supe Valley was the capital city of a “pristine state” as defined by Fried

(1967) and later Haas (1982).

Presently there is debate as to whether Shady’s argument for Caral is valid

considering the florescence of monumental architecture in not only the Supe Valley,

but also the Pativilca and Fortaleza Valleys in the Norte Chico region during the

Late Archaic. Another model is being posited for the region with theoretical
 15
foundations in Renfrew’s (1986) peer polity model for socio-political

organization (Creamer et al. 2006; Haas and Creamer 2006; Vega-Centeno 2005).

Chiefdom

There are two models for human social and political evolution (Service

1962, 1975; Fried 1960, 1967) and subsequent models in the same vein but with

alternate positions to the stage model (see Haas 2001a for a full discussion). Of

these variations, the model for a chiefdom society presented by Service (1962,

1975) is the most comprehensive for his generation (Haas 2001a) and the most

widely used by Andean archaeologists during the early discussions of sociopolitical

organization during the Late Archaic period on the north central coast.

Service’s (1962, 1975) definition of a working chiefdom is based on the

ability of the chiefly line to successfully produce, procure, and redistribute wealth,

food, and other resources for the good of the community. The chiefdom grows

more powerful the more it produces and the better it redistributes these goods.

According to Service (1962, 1975), one of the primary areas where a big-man group

or clan is most likely to develop into a chiefdom is “in coastal regions with highly

variegated land and sea resources” (pg. 75).

As production and redistribution become more successful, chiefly lines

increase their power through ritual means. The chiefly line associates itself with

ancestors through common descent and thus become the centerpieces of a religion

based in ancestor worship, the most prominent signs of which are reflected in the

construction of monuments. As power continues to increase and population rises,

 16
the chiefdom expands and incorporates smaller egalitarian communities. These

smaller communities then become “small-scale replicas” of the larger, central

chiefdom, presumably reflected in the structure of leadership and similarities in

monumental architecture (see Kolb 1994; Kolb and Snead 1997).

One can see how Service’s (1962, 1975) chiefdom model would have been

attractive to the initial investigators of monumental architecture during the Late

Archaic, specifically Feldman (1980, 1987) and Moseley’s (Moseley and Willey

1973; Moseley 1975, 1985, 1992) investigations at the coastal site at Aspero and its

relationship to the abundance of Late Archaic sites in the Norte Chico region as well

as to El Paraiso and La Galgada. The coastal location, monumental architecture,

and similarities in architectural design exactly describe one aspect of Service’s

(1962, 1975) model, however, these hypotheses for the region were developed based

on a relative dearth of archaeological evidence. The following is a discussion of the

first Late Archaic sites excavated in the Andes, including the argument for Aspero

as the center of a chiefdom society in the Norte Chico region.

Aspero

The first significant excavation of Late Archaic monumental architecture in

the Norte Chico region was conducted at Aspero by Feldman (1980). First

discovered by Willey and Corbett (1954) and later identified as having large-scale

architecture by Moseley and Willey (1973), Aspero became an early focal point for

theories on the origins of social complexity in the Andes. The site itself covers over

12 ha and consists of middens and at least seven mound structures located in the
 17
Norte Chico region close to the mouth of the Supe River. Corrected radiocarbon

dates place occupation at Aspero between 3055 and 2533 B.C. According to

Feldman (1980, 1985, 1987), the most important structures are Huaca de los Idolos

and Huaca de los Sacrificios, the oldest and most architecturally complex of which

is Huaca de los Idolos.

Feldman (1980, 1985, 1987) describes the uppermost level (AS1-M) of

Huaca de los Idolos as showing a pattern of graded access, with access becoming

most restricted in room 5 (Fig. 2-1). Based on these findings Feldman (1980, 1985,

1987) states that only a few people or “select group” would have had access to the

“inner sanctum” while others would have to be “content to remain ‘outside’”

(1985:83). Restricted access to temple rooms led Feldman (1980, 1985, 1987) to

the conclusion that social complexity at Aspero was a non-egalitarian chiefdom as

defined by Service (1962). However, Feldman was not completely convinced that

there was any significant social differentiation (1987).

El Paraiso

Before the radiocarbon dating of several large monumental sites in the Norte

Chico region of Peru, El Paraiso was considered the largest Late Archaic site in the

Andes (Moseley 1985; Fung 1988; Quilter 1985). Located in the Chillon Valley

just north of Lima, El Paraiso covers 58 ha with as many as eleven structural groups

(Moore 1996). Initial and continuing theories for El Paraiso consider it a precursor

to the U-shaped mound structures constructed in the Initial Period (Williams 1985;

Moseley 1992). First excavated and partially reconstructed by Engel (1967), the site
 18
was more completely tested by Quilter in 1983 (Quilter 1985). Quilter (1985)

reported at least seven freestanding, individual structures with the possibility of

several more in the area. Uncalibrated dates place occupation between 3790+100

and 3020+60 BP (Quilter 1985).

Figure 2 - 1. Plan of the walls at Huaca de los Idolos, Aspero with an arrow
indicating room 5 (after Feldman 1987).

Units II and VI are the largest structures and are constructed parallel to each

other approximately 180 m apart and 400 m long (Quilter 1985). The small size of

unit I relative to units II and VI (Fig. 2-2) leads Quilter (1985) to suggest that it may

not have been a central component to the site. However, the plan of unit I (Fig. 2-3)

suggests a fairly intricate network of rooms not unlike those found at Aspero.

Though Quilter (1985) does not elaborate on possible social organization at the site
 19
or the region, he does state that it seems likely that there were “a medley of

cultural and social themes being played in the Terminal Preceramic Period” (1985:

297).

La Galgada

Located on the east bank of the Tablachaca River and about 25 km north of

the Santa River, La Galgada is the most complex highland site dated to the Late

Archaic (Grieder and Mendoza 1985; Grieder et al. 1988). La Galgada sits at an

altitude of 1000 m and while this altitude is not very high, Grieder and Mendoza

(1985; Grieder et al. 1988) contend that the setting is of a highland nature as La

Galgada sits in the basin of a deeply cut canyon. There are two mound structures

and several domestic structures as well as a partially destroyed sunken circular

plaza. Dates, c. 2400-1900 B.C., and construction episodes indicate consistent and

permanent occupation of the site for over 500 years (Grieder and Mendoza 1985;

Grieder et al. 1988).

Excavations of Floor 30, dated to c. 2300-2200 B.C., show a large, west-

facing central chamber with at least three other chambers surrounding it

asymmetrically (Fig. 2-4) (Grieder and Mendoza 1985; Grieder et al. 1988).

Grieder and Mendoza (1985) state that:

It seems unlikely that any of these chambers could accommodate all the
eligible members of the community, but we do not know on what basis the
community divided itself among the various chambers that were in use at the
same time. (100)
 20

Figure 2 - 2. Site plan of El Paraiso with the arrow indicating Unit I (after Quilter
1985).

Figure 2 - 3. Floor plan of Unit I at El Paraiso (after Quilter 1985).

 21

Figure 2 - 4. Floor 30, La Galgada (after Quilter and Mendoza 1985).

According to Grieder and Menodoza (1985), the top-most levels typified by

Preceramic to the Initial Period indicate a shift from an egalitarian society to

emergent social class distinctions. La Galgada is the only highland site dating to the

Late Archaic with any significant monumental architecture and is isolated to the

north of the Norte Chico, much like El Paraiso is isolated to the south of the region

(Haas and Creamer 2006).

Pristine State

The idea of a “pristine state” first formulated by Fried (1960, 1967) and later

expounded upon by Haas (1982), centers on the rise of an autochthonous political

power within a region. The “pristine state” for any region is the first or initial state

to which all other later states can trace their development. Fried’s (1960, 1967)
 22
point is that the initial states had no plan to help in a successful development (e.g.

constitutions, legislatures, bureaucracies, armies), they developed in what he calls a

“political vacuum” (232).

Without a plan for development, leadership would have been tenuous at best

with an emphasis on redistribution and cooperation, but with a level of stratified

complexity that had not been attained previously (Fried 1960, 1967). The “pristine

state” would not be developing without the influence of other rising polities in the

region. Instead it would grow as a product of competition, trade, warfare, and

communication, among other factors. However, the presumption is that one

political entity would break away from the pack so to speak. Having developed

more cohesive internal control (e.g. political specialization, professional

organization), this political entity would have the ability to “overrun less well-

organized neighbors and incorporate them within its own system as an inferior

social stratum” (232).

It is within the framework of this theory that Shady (Shady et al. 2003;

Shady 2006) postulates the Caral-Supe or Supe Valley “pristine state”. Shady states

that:

The evidence from Caral indicates that Caral-Supe society was organized
into socially stratified ranks with local authorities connected to a state
government […] with dynamic internal and external exchange that had
acquired significant and complex scientific, technological and artistic
knowledge. Its sphere of domination and direct control included
populations of the Supe, Pativilca, and Fortaleza valleys but it connections
and prestige extended across the entire northcentral Peruvian region. (Shady
2006:63, italics added by author)
 23
Shady further concludes that:

[T]he evidence shows that Caral was the model of sociopolitical

organization that other societies achieved only in later times throughout the
Peruvian territory. (Shady 2006:63)

Caral

Extensive research and excavations have been conducted at Caral since (see

Shady et al 2001, 2003; Shady 2006). The site is located 23 km from the coast in

the Supe Valley and covers around 66 ha. According to Shady (2006), the site

contains 32 public structures as well as several residential groups. Calibrated dates

from Caral indicate site occupation from about 2660-2010 (Shady et al. 2001). The

complex at Caral contains two large and distinctive architectural monuments (The

Great Pyramid and the Temple of the Amphitheater) along with several smaller

mounds (Shady et al. 2003; Shady 2006). A more thorough description of the entire

site will follow in a different section, but it is important for understanding cultural

development in the region through architectural analysis that I address Shady’s

Caral-Supe state hypothesis at this point with a specific emphasis on the Great

Pyramid and the Temple of the Amphitheater.

The Great Pyramid located in Sector E (Fig. 2-5) and in what Shady calls,

“the upper half of Caral,” is the largest architectural structure at the site. The

complex measures 170.8 m east to west and 149.7 m north to south with a height of

19.3 m facing south and up to 29.9 m facing north. A sunken circular plaza is

attached and there is an atrium on top of the mound that restricts space the further

one moves into it (Shady et al. 2003; Shady 2006). There are also several
 24
anterooms on the eastern side of the atrium (Fig. 2-6). The plan of the atrium is a

more regularized version of the floor plan at Huaca de los Idolos, Aspero (Fig. 2-1).

Figure 2 - 5. Site plan of Caral (after Shady 2006).

In the “lower half of Caral” sits the Temple of the Amphitheater located in

Sector L (Fig. 2-5) (Shady 2006). Measuring 157.4 m x 81.6 m with a height of 7.9

m, the complex also contains a rectangular platform that is 26 m wide and 3.2 m

high that extends north off of the sunken circular plaza or “amphitheater”. The

complex is oriented northeast and its entrance faces the large open plaza in the

center of the site (Fig. 2-5). The floor plan of the building shows four distinct room

types: an antechamber, the atrium, large rooms in the rear hall and upper rooms

(Fig. 2-7) (Shady et al. 2003; Shady 2006). Enclosed within the temple walls and
 25

Figure 2 - 6. The Great Pyramid at Caral (after Shady 2006).

Figure 2 - 7. The Temple of the Amphitheater at Caral (after Shady 2006).

 26

sitting to the east is a smaller and separate structure with sunken circular pit

enclosed by walls. Shady (2006) indicates that access to this room would have been

restricted to an “official” with “special status within the complex and the city” (45).

Based on the overall size of the site, the percentage of labor investment

(calculated as a percentage of total labor invested in all Supe sites), and the density

and proximity of seven architectural sites (Pueblo Nuevo, Cerro Colorado, and

Alpacoto on the right border of the river, Lurihuasi, Miraya, Chupicigarro and Caral

on the left border), Shady (Shady et al. 2003; Shady 2006) states that the Supe

Valley and specifically Caral, formed the basis for a “pristine” state. Shady (Shady

et al. 2003; Shady 2006) further suggests that the presence of similar architecture

(sunken circular plazas, tiered platform mounds) in the Pativilca and Fortaleza

Valleys to the north, as well as the mound complex at La Galgada, indicates

regional control and influence disseminating from the capital at Caral. These are

not the only factors that lead Shady to this conclusion, but the others seem

speculative at best.

Peer polity sociopolitical organization

Research conducted outside of the Supe Valley in the surrounding Norte

Chico region has led to a different interpretation of the dynamic sociopolitical

machinations during the Late Archaic (Haas and Creamer 2006; Creamer et al.

2006; Vega-Centeno 2005; 2006). Neither group of researchers follows the concept

of evolving society, nor do they try to define the type of leadership (chief, state
 27
government) in terms of evolutionary models for political development. Instead,

the hypothesis is most closely related to Renfrew’s (1986) peer polity interaction

model for the development of sociopolitical organization.

Peer polity interaction is an attempt to explain the relationships between

individual and autonomous polities and how the interaction between these polities

leads to further sociopolitical organization. The concept of understanding “state”

development through an understanding of relationships between individual polities

was first suggested by Price (1977). Her cluster-interaction model suggests multiple

“pristine states” during two “revolutions” based on modes of production

(agricultural revolution and then irrigation revolution) and the related organizational

shifts (ranked society and then the state). Price (1977) suggests that the clusters are

comparable in all forms of social, political, and economic phenomena and they can

be understood in terms of man/energy relationships and changes in mode of

agricultural production. If one cluster is succeeding it is only doing so because all

of the other clusters are succeeding as well.

Renfrew’s (1986) model takes the focus away from modes of production and

man/energy relationships and instead discusses characteristic similarities between

polities and their spatial relationships geographically. If one polity was more

powerful than the other polities then it is expected that it would be geographically

centralized or hypothetically share a larger portion of territory than the other polities

in the region. Renfrew (1986) tests these geographical relationships by constructing

and analyzing Thiessen polygons. In order to construct the polygons one must
 28
identify early state modules (ESMs) based on similar political, social, and

economic structures. In most cases these similarities are reflected in architecture.

Renfrew (1986) defines six “positive statements” that can be tested within

the framework of a peer polity model:

(1) determine the size and scale of the polities, achieved by determining the ESMs
and then applying Thiessen polygons of similar size to each ESM (Fig. 3)
(2) when “significant organizational change” occurs within one polity it should
occur in the others at essentially the same time
(3) “institutional features” appear in all polities around the same time (e.g. similar
monumental buildings, writing)
(4) the changing features cannot be traced to one individual site, they will develop
in several polities at the same time
(5) transformation occurs because of interaction (e.g. competitive emulation,
symbolic entertainment, warfare)
(6) hierarchical structures occur over time in regions that share similar symbols and
material traits. (Renfrew 1986:7-8)

The striking similarity between architectural features as well as

contemporaneous occupation of sites within such a small area has made the Norte

Chico region an interesting case to test within the framework of Renfrew’s model.

As mentioned earlier, two sets of researchers have suggested the possibility based

almost solely on architectural features. No patterning of site distribution on the

geographical landscape or definitive and quantitative understanding of architectural

similarities has been tested as of yet. However, it is possible to test Renfrew’s

model as well as Fried’s model through the use of the quantitative patterns

established through spatial syntax analysis and to apply those findings within the

framework of a Thiessen polygon model.

 29

Arable Land and Coastal Resources

The underlying debate as to the subsistence strategies that may have led to

the origins of monumental architecture in the Norte Chico region during the Late

Archaic period must be discussed in order to fully understand the development of

the hypotheses in this research. Michael Moseley’s (1975) Maritime Foundations of

Andean Civilization (MFAC) was the leading theory for the origins of civilization in

the Andes. His theory was based on the discovery of Aspero and later expounded

upon by Feldman’s (1980, 1985, 1987) excavations at Aspero. Moseley’s

hypothesis that civilization could emerge and sustain itself on a diet consisting

mainly of coastal resources was revolutionary in its implications and seemingly

made the Peruvian coast and the Andes unique among the five other cradles of

civilization (Mesopotamia, Egypt, India, China, and Mesoamerica).

In the last twenty years, as discoveries in the Norte Chico region (Shady et

al. 2001; Shady and Leyva 2003; Shady 2006; Haas et al. 2004; Haas and Creamer

2006; Vega-Centeno 2005, 2006) as well as highland sites (Grieder and Mendoza

1985; Grieder et al. 1988; Burger 1985) have been made, MFAC has become less

viable. Specific studies on past and present subsistence strategies in the Norte

Chico region (Zechenter 1988) along with the discovery of simple irrigation canals

from the Middle Archaic period in the Zana Valley (Dillehay et al. 2005, 2007) has

led to a shift in theories for the origins of Andean civilization. The other major

issue with Moseley’s hypothesis is the relative dearth of coastal sites dating to the

Late Archaic. It seems clear that occupation of inland sites reached levels that never
 30
occurred on the coast (Shady et al. 2001; Shady and Leyva 2003; Shady 2006;

Haas et al. 2004; Haas and Creamer 2006; Vega-Centeno 2005, 2006). While

coastal resources remained important to subsistence, it has become clear that

domesticated foodstuffs reliant on small-scale irrigation played just as important a

role as marine products in the development of civilization in the Late Archaic.

The paradigm shift in focus from maritime resource exploitation to

exploitation of arable land for the purposes of producing cotton and domesticated

foodstuffs leads to a need to test the relationship between arable land and the

monumental architectural complexes in the Norte Chico region during the Late

Archaic. This is not to say that the cultural processes that were taking place at

Aspero are unimportant to the hypotheses for the development of sociopolitical

complexity in the region. However, the significant number of inland sites, their

scale, and their geographical proximity to one another make it seem as though two

types of communities were coexisting during the Late Archaic, coastal fishing

communities and inland agricultural communities. Haas and Creamer (2006)

suggest this possibility as part of “an alternative working hypothesis” for the region

(754-756).

As part of their hypothesis they speculate that the inland sites were the

power centers and monumental architecture was constructed as a means of

competition to “attract fishing communities.” This research is intended to test the

viability of Haas and Creamer’s hypothesis by focusing specifically on the spatial

organization of inland sites. Data suggesting the presence of small-scale irrigation

canals (Dillehay et al. 2005, 2007; Haas and Creamer 2006) as well as research
 31
detailing the ability to succeed agriculturally during the Late Archaic (Zechenter

1988) necessitates the construction of arable land polygons as a more theoretically

plausible base for the land divisions that will be generated from the Thiessen

polygon analysis.
 CHAPTER 3

THEORY FOR SPACE SYNTAX ANALYSIS AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL

APPLICATIONS

The common goal of archaeologists is to find meaning through artifacts at

the simplest level. It is difficult to take an object that was constructed or made four

thousand years ago and even scratch the surface of meaning that object had to its

maker or makers. The real goal is to simplify, to understand the nature of the

society being studied through the physical materials that are left behind and to

understand the most basic social processes that led to the development of the

artifacts we study today. Hillier and Hanson’s (1984) space syntax analysis aims to

simplify and quantify social process through an understanding of built

environments. A simple explanation for their analysis is that architecture reflects

the society that constructed it.

Buildings may be comparable to other artefacts in that they assemble

elements into a physical object with a certain form; but they are
incomparable in that they also create and order the empty volumes of space
resulting from that object into a pattern. It is this physical ordering of space
that is the purpose of the building, not the physical object itself […] They
appear to be physical artefacts, like any other, and to follow the same type of
logic. But this is illusory. Insofar as they are purposeful, buildings are not
just objects, but transformations of space through objects. (Hillier and
Hanson 1984:1)
 33
The excerpt above states the premise behind developing space syntax

analysis. It becomes too difficult and convoluted to try to understand the actual

meaning behind the buildings themselves, but one can quantify space and through

quantification understand the significance of the placement of structures in a given

environment. The quantification of spaces helps the researcher understand what

restriction of space or lack thereof says about the society that built the environment

with an emphasis on spatial patterning.

Theoretical basis for space syntax analysis

A much more in-depth discussion behind the theory for space syntax

analysis can be found in Shapiro (1997:54-61, 72-74, 81-90), for the purposes of

this research I will provide a simplified discussion. The theoretical premise for

space syntax analysis borrows from four fields of theory: 1) graph theory, 2)

Hillier’s (Hillier, Leaman, Stansall, and Bedford 1976) morphic language theory 3)

systems theory, and 4) philosophical/anthropological theory, specifically Durkheim

and Bourdieu. Through these four fields of theory Hillier and Hanson (1984)

created an analysis that was deductive, quantitative, and reliant on observed spatial

patterns.

Graph theory plays an important role in understanding space syntax analysis,

particularly the equations and language Hillier and Hanson (1984) use to describe

the analysis. Graph theory deals in networks, linkages, nodes, and overall

connectivity of nodes within a network (Taafe and Gauthier 1973). Connectivity is

represented graphically and mathematically and is the basis for access pattern maps
 34
in space syntax analysis as well as the equations that produce relative asymmetry

values. Network analysis is the baseline quantitative theory for space syntax

analysis.

Another primary theoretical basis is Hillier’s morphic language theory based

on a modified concept of morphology (i.e. understanding similarities and

differences in forms expressed by individual sets of phenomena) (Hillier et al.

1976). Morphic language theory is an examination of how similarities and

differences generate from a basic group of objects, relations, and operations

(Shapiro 1997:82). Basically, language syntax is a process that organizes sounds

into meaningful patterns, much as space syntax organizes undifferentiated spaces

into meaningful patterns (Shapiro 1997:82).

Systems theory provides space syntax analysis with the basis for

understanding large-scale order through an analysis of small-scale order. For

instance, systems theory relies on an evaluation of the most basic elements (local)

and how they work together to formulate an understanding of global processes

(Castri 1979). Hillier and Hanson take this particular attribute of systems theory

and apply it through space syntax by analyzing basic units of open and closed space

to examine how these spaces form larger (global) aggregations of spaces (Shapiro

1997:87).

These aggregations may result from either a process of cell subdivision and
accumulation, in which internal permeability is maintained and which results
in buildings, or by a process in which independent cells aggregate but
maintain external permeability, which results in settlements. (Shapiro
1997:87)
 35
In other words, internal permeability describes the nature of the

construction, placement, and arrangement of rooms (cells) within a building that

actually help to form the building. External permeability describes the construction,

placement, and arrangement of architectural features (e.g. buildings, houses, parks)

that define the landscape of a settlement on the whole.

The final theoretical basis for space syntax analysis has a strong foundation

in the anthropological and philosophical theories of Emile Durkheim and Pierre

Bourdieu, as well as other French structuralists. Ideas of social norms and

structures that underlie all societies is a basic tenet of the French structuralist

movement. It is reflected in space syntax through the ways in which spatial

organization is believed to reflect the integration or segregation of society (Shapiro

1997:88-89). Integration and segregation of spatial organization are to spatial

syntax what organic and mechanical solidarity were to Durkheim and his theories

for understanding society and culture (Hillier and Hanson 1984). Though the

analysis was developed by two architects and uses mathematical and graphic

principles, it has a firm foundation in anthropological theory.

As mentioned earlier, space syntax analysis provides an archaeologist with a

simplified analysis through which architecture and space can be quantified. This

simplification leads to one of the main critiques of the analysis. Leach (1978)

criticizes the analysis for not considering culturally defined meanings of space (e.g.

who has access to sunken circular plazas, what cultural meaning does the circle

hold). Shapiro (1997) states that: “[t]his criticism misses the purpose of space

syntax, which is to focus upon the process and nature of space and structuring”
 36
(110). In other words, space syntax looks to assess only spatial organization and

the possibility for interaction among spaces within a system. In this way the

analysis serves as only one part of understanding the society on the whole.

Another concern with the analysis is its subjectivity (Shapiro 1997). If more

than one investigator is conducting the analysis there are inherent problems in

individual perceptions of space. However, this particular research avoids the

problem in that one investigator is analyzing all of the material. One can never

expect an analysis to be completely objective, but having conducted the analysis

repeatedly I find that the results of the calculations remain generally the same and

the analysis should be repeatable by future investigators.

Other difficulties with the analysis focus on the issues of time and site

preservation. These problems have already been discussed in a previous chapter,

but it will be reiterated here that this research assumes contemporaneous occupation

at all sites during the time period between 2200 and 2000 B.C. The assumption is

that the sites under investigation looked much the same way they do now during the

latter stages of the Late Archaic period in the Andes. Site destruction is an

unfortunate byproduct of elapsed time, so the sites can only be analyzed as they

remain at present.

Archaeological Applications

American Southwest. Space syntax has been applied at several sites in the

American Southwest (Bradley 1993; Bustard 1996; Cooper 1995; Ferguson 1996;

Potter 1998; Shapiro 1997; Van Dyke 1999; Stone 2000) specifically because of its
 37
simplification of architectural features. Each study cites an overwhelming amount

of data for the sites they wish to work on, including extensive excavations as well as

highly detailed chronologies. The goal in the Southwest is to use space syntax as a

means to understand the development of social inequality through time by analyzing

changes in architecture and spatial organization at individual sites.

Van Dyke (1999) uses space syntax to examine social organization over time

at the Chacoan great house at Guadalupe Ruin. The goal of her investigation is to

develop a clearer understanding of the function of Chacoan great houses as they

pertain to social organization. According to Van Dyke (1999), Guadalupe Ruin is a

good site for this type of analysis because there are three well-dated and

documented construction episodes.

Using space syntax analysis, Van Dyke (1999) relies on relative assymetry

(RA), relative ringiness (RR), and real relative assymetry (RRA) values to analyze

her data. She finds that asymmetry is relatively low during all phases of occupation

at Guadalupe Ruin, but the most asymmetry occurs during the earliest phase. Van

Dyke’s (1999) analysis did not have values for ringiness because the configurations

of the structures were completely nondistributed. The analysis is contradictory in

these conclusions. The asymmetry value suggests site integration or “openness”

while the lack of ringiness and nondistributed configuration suggests an

“exclusionary capacity.” Through a discussion of room construction and pueblo

layout Van Dyke (1999) explains her findings. The symmetry indicates a patterning

where no single household has status over another while the nondistributed pattern

indicates a desire to provide boundaries between households.

 38
Van Dyke (1999) concludes that Guadalupe Ruin was a domestic structure

composed of equivalent households that could only be accessed from the roof or

plazas of the structure. The study did not help in understanding why some people

and not others lived in the great house, but did conclude that among those living in

the great house there was no social inequality (Van Dyke 1999).

In an investigation of four sites dated to the Masonry period (A.C. 1000-

1450) in the Point of Pines region, Arizona, Stone (2000) uses space syntax analysis

to examine socio-political organization during and after the Kayenta migration

episode (see Stone 2000:197-198). Her specific focus is on the integration and use

of public space. Stone (2000) uses a different suite of equations from space syntax

analysis. She focuses more on fragmentation or integration of space rather than

accessibility and distributedness to and of architectural features. These measures

are slightly different than those being measured by this study, but lead to similar

types of results.

The results of Stone’s (2000) analysis indicate a trend toward more site

fragmentation through time at each site, but with a return to greater integration of

space by A.C. 1400. The trending towards fragmented space coincides directly with

the migration and occupation of sites by the Kayenta and the return to more

integrated space coincides with the end of the Kayenta occupation. The correlation

suggests that the occupants of the sites under investigation began segregating

themselves socially from the Kayenta as they migrated into the site and once the

Kayenta were pushed out the occupants went back to the lifestyle they lived before

the Kayenta migration (Stone 2000).

 39
The work conducted in the American Southwest gives a clear indication as

to the applicability and pertinence of space syntax analysis when studying the

development of social complexity and organization through time. There is also a

reiteration of the fact that space syntax analysis should only be used as a part of an

archaeological investigation and that the quantified values garnered from the

analysis must be understood within the framework and context of the site or sites

being examined.

South America. The use of space syntax analysis in Andean archaeology

has been limited. The most comprehensive use of the analysis is Moore’s (1996)

access pattern (justified permeability map) analysis of North Coast sites before the

rise of the Chimu state in comparison to the architectural design of Chan Chan

during the Chimu period. Moore (1996) also uses space syntax to analyze previous

hypotheses about the nature of the differences among the Chan Chan ciudadela

through time, specifically focusing on architectural changes as they correlate with

changes in socio-political organization. The hypothesized changes seem to coincide

with periods of consolidation of power, territorial expansion, wide ranging

development of agricultural projects, and periods of environmental catastrophes

(Moore 1996:194).

In order to analyze whether Chan Chan represents a change in architectural

design in the North Coast, Moore (1996) constructs access pattern maps for

architectural compounds at Pampa Grande, Galindo, Pacatnamu, Chan Chan,

Farfan, and Manchan. With an emphasis on site depth and patterning of site access,

Moore (1996) examines architectural continuity from the earlier Moche V sites
 40
(Pampa Grande, Galindo) to the later Chimu ciudadela at Chan Chan.

Interestingly, Moore (1996) does not find a difference in pattern of access from

Moche V to Chimu architecture, but rather a shift to larger scale sites as identified

through the exponentially higher levels of depth in the Chimu ciudadela. His

conclusion is that Chimu architecture represents a fundamentally different

architectural organization of interior space as measured by depth. In other words,

while the pattern of space may not be different, the depth and scope of the ciudadela

at Chan Chan represent an abrupt and large scale change from the earlier Moche V

sites (Moore 1996:191-92).

The second part of his analysis focuses on the development of socio-political

complexity as it is reflected in the changes in architectural features through time.

He bases his analysis within the context of three relative chronologies (Topic and

Moseley 1982; Kolata 1990; Cavallaro 1991) and two hypotheses (Klymyshyn

1987; Kolata 1990) as to why architectural features changed over time. With the

exception of Cavallaro’s (1991) chronology, Moore does not find a correlation

between increasing depth and time. In fact, he finds that even though scale and

architectural features may fluctuate over time, the access patterns and means for

restriction of access was a feature of North Coast architecture that began during

Moche V and continued from the first ciudadela constructed at Chan Chan to the

last (Moore 1996: 203-05).

Recently, Rafael Vega-Centeno (2005) used space syntax analysis to

illustrate the ritual implications of socio-political organization at the community

level. His analysis of the site at Cerro Lampay in the Fortaleza Valley yielded
 41
results that indicated what he calls emergent leadership controlled by the

ritualistic nature of the community. This control, according to Vega-Centeno

(2005), is manifested in the architectural design of the site. The relative asymmetry

values and relative ringiness values suggest a site that was relatively permeable with

the easiest access occurring in the rooms at the back of the structure. These rooms,

Vega-Centeno argues, were community rooms that everyone living on-site had

access to. The lack of an exclusionary capacity in these rooms leads Vega-Centeno

to the conclusion that leadership was negotiated through ritual activities. According

to Vega-Centeno (2005), the front part of the structure was designed to be inviting

to outsiders while maintaining an air of power and community cohesion.

Space syntax analysis is a very robust test within which many elements of

spatial organization can be quantified. The examples provided in this chapter deal

with the use of space syntax to understand developing socio-political organization

through time. Space syntax analysis for the Late Archaic sites in the Norte Chico

will not be able to quantify development of or change in sociopolitical organization

through time. Using space syntax analysis to suggest the purpose or function of a

site is also outside the boundaries of the analysis. The element of space syntax

analysis that is most pertinent to this research is the ability to quantify and establish

patterns of spatial organization. Quantification in the examples provided in this

chapter helps in developing a pattern of change over time. In the case of this

research quantification will provide the basis for understanding a pattern of spatial

organization at the assumed apex of social organization in the region at the end of

the Late Archaic period.

 CHAPTER 4

SITE DESCRIPTIONS AND SPACE SYNTAX ANALYSIS

The intent of this research is to focus specifically on monumental

architectural complexes from the Late Archaic Norte Chico. This data section will

only describe the multi-mound sites that are to be tested using space syntax analysis

because they have some unique characteristics. The sites with single mounds follow

a general pattern of one platform mound with a raised square platform and sunken

circular plaza (Upaca, Carreteria, Cerro Lampay, Cerro Blanco 2, Cerro de la Cruz,

Shaura) (see Vega-Centeno et al. 1998; Vega-Centeno 2005, 2006; Haas and Ruiz

2003; Creamer et al. 2007). There are a total of 20 sites that will be included in the

Thiessen polygon analysis based on radiocarbon dates to the Late Archaic period or

characteristic Late Archaic architecture where dates are not published. There are

more comprehensive discussions of the sites included in this section (see Shady et

al. 2003; Shady 2007; Haas and Ruiz 2004; Creamer et al. 2007; Vega-Centeno

1998, 2005; Zechenter 1988; Chun 2003). I will start with the Supe Valley and

work north to the Pativilca Valley and then to the Fortaleza Valley. I will also

describe the sites as they move from west to east up each valley (e.g., in the

Fortaleza Valley: Porvenir, Caballete, Huaricanga). Along with the site description

there will be a discussion about how the carrier space was defined for each site. The
 43
site maps that were used for the spatial syntax analysis can be found in an

Appendix.

Supe Valley

In this discussion of the sites at Era de Pando, Lurihuasi, Miraya, and

Alpacoto, Zechenter (1988) will be the primary source for a more extensive

discussion see Shady (Shady et al. 2003). The site description of Caral uses Shady

(2006) as the primary source. Zechenter breaks the sites into sectors, I will follow

her descriptive model.

Era de Pando

Located on the northern margin of the Supe River, the site at Era de Pando is

dominated by a large pyramidal mound that measures 80 X 80 m with an associated

sunken circular plaza that is 20 m in diameter and sits in the center of a square court

that is 50 X 50 m. The extent of the site is 100 ha.

Sector A

Located in the NW section of the site, Sector A contains the large pyramidal

structure discussed above. The structure is surrounded by several other architectural

features in the vague shape of a U.

Sector B
 44
Sector B is located in the SW portion of the site and contains an elongated

pyramidal structure covered with circular pits.

Sector C

Located in the SE section of the site, Sector C contains several elongated

pyramids possibly in the shape of a U but heavily damaged. No sunken circular

plaza is attached.

Carrier Space

The entry point (carrier space) at Era de Pando was determined to be in the

S/SE portion of the site. There are several reasons for this determination. First, the

overall site orientation faces the Supe River to the south. Also the largest pyramidal

structure with the attached sunken circular plaza has a southern orientation and

coastal mountains as well as smaller mounds that seem to form a wall behind the

main complex surround the northern section of the site. The western section of the

site is entirely covered by architecture and there seems to be a smaller central

mound in the southern portion of the site much like other sites in the region

(Caballete, Pampa San Jose) that seems to demarcate an entry point, at least in a

ceremonial context.

Lurihuasi

Identified as Chupicigarro Chico in Zechenter (1988), Lurihuasi covers 20

ha and contains between 8 and 10 mounds. The site sits on the southern bank or
 45
right margin of the Supe River facing upstream and is about 3.5 km west of Caral

and about 23.5 km inland. The single calibrated radiocarbon date puts occupation

of Lurihuasi at 2610 B.C. Zechenter (1988) does not break Lurihuasi into sectors;

however she describes the SW portion of the site as the locus for the major mound

structures. The overall orientation of the site is a U-shape facing the Supe River on

a north-south axis.

Carrier Space

Carrier space for Lurihuasi was defined as entry into the site walking north

to south from the Supe River. The orientation and design of the site makes this

point of the entry the only one that is viable. Much like Era de Pando and Porvenir,

the entry into Lurihuasi is intuitive based on its structural design and spatial layout.

Miraya

Identified as Chupicigarro Oeste in Zechenter (1988), Miraya sits in between

Lurihuasi and Caral on the right margin of the Supe River facing upstream. Miraya

contains a highly dense population of mound structures with a several different

orientations. There is a large pyramidal structure in Shady and Leyva’s (2003)

Sector A that seems to correspond with Zechenter’s (1988) Sector A. There is also

a smaller mound complex with a sunken circular plaza in the SE section of the site.

Sector A
 46
Zechenter (1988) calls this the main sector of the site. Sector A contains a

complex of three elongated mounds that form a U surrounding a rectangular central

plaza oriented along a north-south axis, however, Shady and Leyva’s (2003) site

map shows the large pyramid with a façade and central staircase with an outline of a

circular plaza oriented to the SE.

Sector B

This sector sits to the SE of Sector A and contains a smaller U-shaped

structure with a sunken circular plaza attached and seemingly oriented on a north-

south axis.

Sector C

Sector C is in the southern portion of the site and contains several mounds in

an irregular U-shape surrounding a rectangular plaza.

Carrier Space

The entry point for Miraya was determined to be from the NE section of the

site walking SW from the Supe River. Entry from the SE seems unlikely based on

the elevation of the natural landscape and entry from the SW suffers from the same

problem. The western portion of the site contains a fairly large pyramidal mound as

well as an as yet unidentified architectural complex immediately south of the

pyramidal mound. The final factor in determining the entry point was the
 47
orientation of the sunken plazas. Of the three that are present, two face NE while

the third faces SE as part of what seems to be an informal U shape.

Caral

For a discussion on the location of Caral see chapter 3. In her discussion of

the site at Caral, Shady (2007) divides the complex into two parts, the “upper half”

and the “lower half”. For the purposes of this site description I will follow her

method of describing Caral with a discussion of the “upper half” first, followed by

the “lower half.”

The Upper Half

The upper half of Caral in comprised of six mound pyramidal mound

structures. The area contains the Great Pyramid, which is the largest structure in the

site, as well as an extensive residential area. Four mounds sit in the western section

of the upper half: the Great Pyramid (sunken circular plaza attached), the Central

Pyramid, the Quarry Pyramid and the Lesser Pyramid (Shady 2006). In the eastern

section sit the Pyramid of the Gallery and the Pyramid of the Huanca.

The Great Pyramid. The Great Pyramid is oriented so that the back of the

mound faces the Supe River to the NE while the front of the mound faces the inner

plaza to the SW. Attached to the front of the mound is a sunken circular plaza, the

internal wall of which is 3 m high and the external wall is between 1.0 and 1.6 m

high (Shady 2006). The diameter of the entire structure is 35.5 m with the sunken
 48
area stretching 21.5 m across. There is an entrance stairway leading into the

plaza externally with a subsequent stairway leading in internally. Walking along the

north-south axis through the plaza there is another internal stairway leading up to

the raised platform that connects the mound with the sunken plaza (Shady 2006).

As one ascends the stairs leading to the atrium the space becomes more

restricted. At the top of the mound, facing the sunken plaza, the Quarry Pyramid

sits to the SW in Sector B along with the Central Pyramid in Sector C which Shady

(2006) does not describe. The Lesser Pyramid sits to the SE of the Great Pyramid in

Sector G and the Pyramids of the Gallery and Huanca sit to the SE in Sectors H and

I respectively.

The Quarry Pyramid. The Quarry Pyramid sits to the SW of the Great

Pyramid in Sector B and its front faces the large open plaza. The mound measures

44 m north to south, 65.6 m east to west and its height is 13.8 m. The pyramid

contains a central staircase leading to the top that measures 4.2 m wide with nine

separate terraces flanking it on the way up. There is evidence for several

construction episodes and the pyramid is flanked by residential construction on the

south and west sides.

The Lesser Pyramid. The Lesser Pyramid is SE of the Great Pyramid in

Sector G and measures 49.9 m east to west, 43.3 m north to south and is 10 m in

height. The western façade is oriented so that it faces the Great Pyramid and there

is a central stairwell 4.65 m wide on this façade that leads to the top of the pyramid.

There is a residential complex on the eastern side of the pyramid.

 49
The Pyramid of the Gallery. This pyramid sits east of the central plaza in

Sector H with the western façade facing the Central Pyramid. The mound measures

71.9 m north to south, 68.5 m east to west and is 18.6 m in height. The western

façade contains a central stairwell that is 6.8 m wide. There is a subterranean

gallery measuring 4.5 m long and 2.5 m wide that is accessed by a long passageway.

There are also residential dwellings associated with the mound on the SW side.

The Pyramid of the Huanca. The pyramid is located in Sector I at the

extreme SE part of the upper half of the complex. The structure measures 54 m east

to west, 52 m north to south, and is 12.8 m high. Its façade faces the Pyramid of the

Gallery with a 2.15 m tall huanca “connecting” the two structures.

The Lower Half

The Temple of the Amphitheater. The “lower half” of Caral is distinguished

by its east-west axis orientation and is dominated by the Temple of the

Amphitheater. Specifics of this temple are discussed in Chapter 2.

Pyramid of the Circular Altar. Located in the central section of the “lower

half” in Sector P, this pyramid measures 44 m east to west, 27 m north to south, and

is 5.9 m in height. Shady (2006) defines three components for this pyramid, the

largest being the central portion containing an atrium. The other two components

are adjoining rooms to the east and west of the central structure. The façade, facing

north, contains a staircase that is 4 m wide that leads to the atrium. Behind the

atrium are seven rooms, two built in the model of the atrium but in a smaller scale.

The eastern component holds six quadrangular rooms and the western component
 50
contains two entry stairways, one of which connects to the rear rooms of the

central atrium.

Carrier Space

The carrier space for Caral is difficult to define. The most likely point of

entry would be from the east walking west. Much of the domestic architecture is

built in the NE corner and the western section of the site. Also, the high north side

of the Great Pyramid indicates a desire to make the structure look larger and

possibly more intimidating to travelers coming from the river. It seems likely that

the Great Pyramid was constructed to deter people from entering the city from the

north. The other mounds have their access points facing the inner plaza as well. It

seems that the likeliest possible entryway with the least resistance as far as

architectural structures and possible symbolic meaning is in the SE section of the

site in the “lower half” of the complex.

Alpacoto

Located on the northern or left margin of the Supe River, Alpacoto sits about

1.5 km directly to the north of Caral and contains a U-shape structure facing the

south. A calibrated radiocarbon date places occupation of Alpacoto at 2150 B.C.

There is also a sunken circular plaza attached to a highly damaged structure in the

NE portion of the site. The site covers approximately 40 ha.

Sector A
 51
Sector A is the main portion of the site containing the U-shaped complex.

As stated above it is oriented facing the Supe River almost directly south.

Sector B

Sitting in the NE portion of the site, Sector B contains the sunken circular

plaza described above with fallen huancas inside of it.

Carrier Space

The entry point for Alpacoto was determined to be in the SW portion of the

site, walking NE from the Supe River. Again, there is a small central mound

oriented, and possibly associated, with the central mound of the complex. The

façade of the central mound is oriented to the SW and the informal U structure has

the same orientation.

Pativilca Valley

Punta y Suela

Located on the right side of the Pativilca River, Punta y Suela sits 8 km from

the coast and is composed of two large mounds and an additional six small mounds

as well as two sunken circular plazas (Creamer et al. 2007). The calibrated

radiocarbon date range for the site is between 9170 and 560 B.C. The complex,

with extensive residential construction included, covers 100 ha. Creamer et al.
 52
(2004) divide their site descriptions into sectors, for the purposes of description of

the Pativilca Valley I will follow their descriptive model.

Sector A

Sector A contains the largest mound structure and is located in the SE

portion of the site. The mound measures 40 X 50 m and is 12 m high with a sunken

circular plaza (now destroyed) attached. The sunken circular plaza and eastern

façade have a NE orientation facing what are now plowed fields but what was

formerly an open plaza. The top of the mound features walls for rooms as well as a

huanca.

Sector B

Sector B sits 50 m north of the main mound complex in Sector A and

contains five mounds and one platform structure. All of the mounds in this sector

are damaged extensively due to modern agriculture. The largest mound in the sector

measures 24 X 26m and is 4 m high. There is also evidence for a sunken circular

plaza attached to this mound with a diameter of 15 m but it has been covered by

modern road (this plaza will be taken into consideration for the space syntax

analysis). The southern façade and sunken plaza of this mound are oriented to face

the northern side of the mound in Sector A. Two relatively large mounds and the

platform structure sit directly east of the largest mound in Sector B in a linear

distribution. The final two mounds in the sector sit to the north and NE of the

largest mound.
 53

Sector C

The second largest mound at the site is located in Sector C 400 m SE of the

main mound complex. The mound itself has been extensively damaged by

subsequent episodes of road construction as well as the placement of an electrical

pole in the center of the mound. The mound measures 37 X 74 m and is 6 m in

height. The damage allowed Creamer et al. (2007) to investigate construction

episodes without extensive excavation (for further discussion, see Creamer et al.

2007:30-31). This mound will not be included in the space syntax analysis, as its

dates do not correspond to the Late Archaic period.

Carrier Space

The orientation and U shape of Punta y Suela led to the determination that

the entry point for the site is in the NE section walking SW towards the central

mound and sunken circular plaza. A little over 1 km to the east of the site are high

coastal mountains and to the west are terraced fields sloping down towards the

Pativilca River making it unlikely that entry would occur from the east or west.

Like many other sites one façade of the central mound is built more steeply than the

façade facing the public plaza. At Punta y Suela this façade is on the SW side,

making it unlikely that the builders wanted anyone entering from behind the central

mound.
 54

Pampa San Jose

Carlos Williams published the first reports on Pampa San Jose in 1985 under

the name San Jose. Sitting on the right bank of the Pativilca River this complex is

one of the largest and most highly organized architecturally in the Norte Chico

region, and is the finest example of the architecture that has come to typify the

Norte Chico region during the Late Archaic period in the Pativilca Valley. One

interesting note from Williams’s (1985) work on Pampa San Jose is the description

of huancas encircling the sunken circular plaza, these huancas were no longer

present by the time Creamer et al. (2007) reassessed the site in 2002.

The complex is oriented in a SE direction with a large main mound and large

sunken circular plaza attached. The calibrated radiocarbon dates range between

2230 and 1870 B.C. The main mound is flanked by large mounds on the left and

right and faces a smaller central mound that is about 300 m to the SE. The entire

structure takes the form of a U with flanking mounds placed in a linear distribution

to the SW of the main complex and a natural rise flanking in the east NE section of

the site.

Sector A

Sector A contains the largest mound in the complex with an associated

sunken circular plaza. The mound measures 73 X 101 m and is 20 m in height. The

sunken plaza is 39.6 m in diameter and formerly was encircled by huancas, but is
 55
now a water resevoir surrounded by agricultural fields. The central part of the

mound contains a three-walled atrium as well as the remnants of a staircase leading

up to the atrium as well as down to the sunken circular plaza.

Sector B

Sitting to the east of the main mound, Sector B contains a large platform

construction measuring 38 x 42 m and 7 m in height. The façade is oriented to the

SE.

Sector C

Sector C sits to the east of Sector B and contains a platform construction

measuring 35 X 40 m. Its orientation is also to the SE.

Miscellaneous mound architecture

Along with the small central mound that faces the largest mound at the

complex there are also six other structures that when viewed in conjunction with the

larger structures form a rectangular plaza. Many of the structures in the SW portion

of the site, as well as the small central mound, have been destroyed by modern

agriculture. There is a distinct possibility that some of the individual mounds in the

SW section could have been one continuous structure and will be treated as such in

the space syntax analysis. The natural rise in the NE section of the site will also be

taken into account in the analysis as the rise reaches the same height as the main

mound.
 56
It should also be noted that a one mound Late Archaic site (Carreteria) sits

about 1 km SE of Pampa San Jose and is oriented in a NW direction so that the NW

façade and the attached sunken circular plaza directly face the SE façade and sunken

circular plaza at Pampa San Jose. There is some discussion that these two sites are

actually one very large site (Haas 2008, personal communication), but will not be

treated as such in the space syntax analysis.

Carrier Space

The entry point is likeliest from the SE portion of the site, walking NW

towards the central mound and sunken plaza. Pampa San Jose has a small central

mound facing the main mound as well as platform mounds in the western portion of

the site and a natural rise in the eastern portion that form an overall site structure of

a U. The NE façade opposite the façade facing the public plaza is built more steeply

Vinto Alto

Vinto Alto is located on the left bank of the Pativilca River in a town of the

same name. Because of its location, all but the largest elements of Vinto Alto have

been destroyed by the community, including the placement of a cemetery in the

likeliest spot for a sunken circular plaza. Calibrated radiocarbon dates for Vinto

Alto range between 2580 and 2100 B.C. However, the mounds at Vinto Alto

constitute the largest mounds in terms of volume in the Norte Chico, partially due to

the use of natural features as the bases for the mound structures.
 57
Sector A and B

Located side by side, Sectors A and B are two individual mound complexes

each containing platform constructions and located in the southern section of the

site. The Sector A mound measures 74 X 85 m and is 23 m in height, while Sector

B measures 58 X 91 m and is 18 m high. At the top of the Sector A mound is a

huanca with possible iconographic inscriptions and the modern cemetery described

above is located to the north of Sectors A and B.

Sector C

Sector C is a natural feature that was modified for architectural use. A side

of the hill was modified into an atrium that split the two natural peaks of the hill and

is oriented to face south. Sector D is a platform construction associated with Sector

C and located west of Sector C.

Miscellaneous mound architecture

Aerial photographs (SAN 1970) show another possible mound or platform

construction sitting directly west of Sectors A and B, this mound structure will be

included in the syntactic analysis.

Carrier Space

The determined carrier space for Vinto Alto is the entryway in the SE

portion of the site walking NW. Again there is the presence of steep-sided mounds
 58
the backs of which (Sectors C and D) face the Pativilca River to the north. Much

like Caral it seems likely that one would enter from the SE after having walked from

the river and around the mounds in Sectors C and D.

Huayto

The site at Huayto sits the farthest east of the coast and is the eastern extent

of the Late Archaic sites in the Pativilca Valley. Located on the right bank of the

Pativilca River, Huayto sits on the north/NW portion of a natural hilltop and is

composed of three mound structures forming a U and a fourth structure sitting

directly behind the northern arm of the U. The site is oriented facing east and has an

attached sunken circular plaza oriented in the same direction. The two calibrated

radiocarbon dates for Huayto are 2270 and 2240 B.C., both taken from the mound in

Sector C. Creamer et al. (2007) separate Huayto into seven sectors, this discussion

will focus on Sectors A-D.

Sector A

Sector A contains a platform mound that measures 68 X 75 m and is 7 m

high with evidence of an atrium facing the plaza. The Sector A mound constitutes

the central pyramid of the U structure with Sector B flanking it to the north and

Sector C flanking to the south. The partially destroyed sunken circular plaza is

associated with Sector A and will be accounted for in the space syntax analysis.

Sector B
 59
As stated above, Sector B flanks Sector A to the north and forms the

northern or left side of the U structure. Sector B measures 55 X 127 m and is an

elongated rectangular platform. At 9 m high, the NW portion of the platform sits

higher than the central mound, but the platform tapers down to 3 m high in the NE

section of the construction.

Sector C

Sector C has an elongated platform mound that measures 50 X 95 m and is

divided into two separate platforms that are each about 8 m high. Sector C

constitutes the southern or right arm of the overall U shape.

Sector D

Sector D contains a smallish, irregularly shaped mound that measures 55 X

65 m and is 1 m in height. The Sector D mound sits about 5-10 m directly west of

the northern or left arm of the U structure and could be domestic architecture.

Carrier Space

There is only one viable entryway in Huayto entering from the western side

of the site and walking east. The steep facades on the W side of the mound in

Sector A, the N side of the mound in Sector B, and the S side of the mound in

Sector C make it unlikely that anyone would be entering from those sides. The site

also sits on a steep ridge making it unlikely that anyone would be scaling the sides

of the ridge to enter the site.

 60

Fortaleza Valley

Porvenir

Site descriptions for the Fortaleza Valley are taken from Haas and Ruiz

2003. The site of Porvenir sits on the north or left margin of the Fortaleza River.

The site consists of six mounds in the irregular shape of a U and contains two

sunken circular plazas attached to two separate mounds, the central mound structure

and the mound structure that sits to the west of the central mound. The calibrated

radiocarbon dates are between 3720 and 1280 B.C. with two dates of 2320 and 2210

B.C. The site is oriented on a north-south axis, with the central mound sitting in the

northern section of the site buttressed by natural highlands to its rear and two

structures sitting to the west and east of center. The site is surrounded on three sides

by coastal mountains and the large rectangular plaza opens out to the modern

agricultural plain.

Sector A

Sector A contains the central mound structure with an associated sunken

circular plaza. The mound measures 50 X 45 meters and is 10 meters high at its

highest point. The sunken circular plaza with an associated rectangular platform sits

at the base of the southern façade facing the large rectangular plaza and measures

approximately 30 m in diameter.
 61
Sector B

The mound in Sector B sits to the SW of the central mound in Sector A. It

measures 40 X 34 m and is 10 m high. There is a depression in the central portion

of the eastern façade that is identified as an atrium. The attached sunken circular

plaza is at the base of the eastern façade and the internal diameter is 23 m. The

sunken plaza also shows evidence of a stairway leading into the plaza and one

directly across from it leading out of the plaza and up to the atrium.

Sector C

The mound in Sector C sits between those in Sectors B and D and measures

40 X 21 m and is 10 m high.

Sector D

The mound in Sector D is located to the west of the structure in Sector A.

The quadrangular platform mound measures 35 m on its sides and has a height of 10

m.

Sector E

Located in the extreme SE portion of the site, Sector E contains two low

platform mounds that cover an area of 33 X 70 m. The southern platform has sides

measuring 35 m and has an irregular shape with an area of 33 X 28 m. The

platforms are separated by 12 m.

 62

Sector F

Located in the eastern section of the site, Sector F contains a mound with a

rectangular base measuring 75 X 40 m that is 10 m high. The northern façade of the

mound has been extensively damaged by heavy machinery.

Sector G

The mound in Sector G sits immediately to the south of that in Sector F.

The only description of the area is that the mound is similar to the one found in

Sector F with the same orientation and dimensions with less modern alterations than

the mound in Sector F.

Carrier Space

Porvenir is surrounded by coastal mountains on three sides, so the only

viable point of entry is in the southern portion of the site walking north towards the

central mound and sunken plaza.

Caballete

Located on the north or left margin of the Fortaleza River about 10 km from

the coast. Caballete has undergone the most extensive excavations of any multi-

mound site in the Fortaleza Valley. Caballete contains six mounds of varying sizes

that form the shape of a U. The smallest mound in the complex sits in the center of

the site, much like the small mound structure at Pampa San Jose, though the
 63
orientation is unknown it seems likely that the façade faced that of the large

central mound in the complex. The site also contains three sunken circular plazas,

one of which has been destroyed. The site is oriented in a NE direction and the

calibrated radiocarbon dates range between 3120-1620 B.C. with 12 dates ranging

between 2600 and 2000 B.C.

Sector A

Sector A contains the central mound of the site with an attached sunken

circular plaza. Measuring 100 X 40 m and 20 m in height, this mound is the largest

in the Fortaleza Valley. The sunken circular plaza sits at the base of the NE façade

and its diameter is 15 m. The sunken plaza itself is encircled by upwards of 17

huancas, much like the attached sunken plaza at Pampa San Jose. The orientation of

the mound is in a NE direction and the SW façade of the mound is built in a much

steeper fashion than the NE façade facing the enclosed rectangular plaza.

Sector B

In the extreme northern portion of the site and sitting to the NW of the

central mound, Sector B contains a large platform mound measuring 55 X 37 m

with a height of 8 m. The attached rectangular plaza, within which sits a sunken

circular plaza, measures 35 X 30 m while the circular portion measure 24 m in

diameter. The rectangular platform and sunken circular plaza sit at the base of the

SE façade facing the large rectangular public plaza as well as the small central

mound discussed earlier. There is also a depression on the SE façade of the mound
 64
indicating an atrium. The NW façade also displays a steeper drop to the base of

the mound much like the central mound.

Sector C

Located directly NW of the central mound, Sector C contains a mound

structure measuring 30 X 26 m with an approximate height of 5 m. The SE façade

faces the central mound and the NE façade faces the mound in Sector B.

Sector D

Sitting in the eastern portion of the site, Sector D contains a mound

measuring 100 X 35 m with an upper platform measuring 37 X 35 m. The mound is

7 m high and the NW façade faces the mound in Sector B and the small central

mound. There is also a depression on the NW façade indicating an atrium.

Sector E

Located in the extreme southern portion of the site, Sector E sits

immediately SE of the central mound complex. The structure measures 60 X 40 m

and is approximately 8 m high. The orientation of the mound is slightly more

northerly than the central mound. On the N/NE façade there is an atrium and at the

base of this façade is a destroyed sunken circular plaza and a possible rectangular

plaza surrounding the sunken plaza.

Carrier Space
 65
The most likely point of entry at Caballete is in the NE portion of the site

walking SW towards the central mound and sunken plaza. Again, a small central

mound is present and the site is flanked to its NW and SE by coastal mountains and

is orientated facing the mouth of a quebrada. Also, the facades on each mound that

are opposite the respective facades facing public plaza are built in a steeper fashion.

This design seems to indicate a desire to keep people from entering anywhere else

but from the NE.

Huaricanga

Perhaps the most unusual site in the region, the site at Huaricanga contains

an elongated Late Archaic mound that seems to have been built horizontally through

time rather than vertically (Haas and Ruiz 2003). The site also contains a smaller

mound with an associated circular plaza, though the plaza is not sunken, instead it is

demarcated by large boulders. There is also an extensive Initial Period component

that consists of a large U-shaped complex with a sunken square courtyard and an

extended enclosed rectangular courtyard.

Huaricanga is about 25 km from the coast and sits in an area that opens up

after a canyon-like choking of the Fortaleza Valley by coastal mountains. The site

sits on the right margin of the Fortaleza River and is less than a kilometer from the

river. The calibrated radiocarbon dates for the site range between 3570-670 B.C.

with 11 dates between 2790 and 2190. At the base of the northern façade of the

largest Late Archaic mound there has been complete destruction due to quarrying

and some of the large stones used to build the mound itself have been quarried. The
 66
destruction at this site makes it difficult to analyze using space syntax, but it will

be included.

Carrier Space

The carrier space for Huaricanga is unique for the region. It seems as if the

carrier space could be located both north and south of the site. The unique design of

the site with what looks to be an atrium that is open on both facades as well as the

possibility of sunken circular plazas on each side of the largest mound makes it

necessary to assume that entry into the site was supposed to occur from both sides.

Results from Space Syntax Analysis

Supe Valley

Two sets of maps were used for the space syntax analysis of the Supe

Valley. One set was taken from Shady and Levya (2003)(Table 4.1) and the other

from Zechenter (1988)(Table 4.2). The reasoning for the use of both is that the

maps from Shady and Levya (2003) tend to be idealizations of sites taken from field

drawings by Williams and Merino (1979), whereas Zechenter’s (1988) are maps

made in the field. The reality of the k (spaces), MD (mean depth), RA (relative

asymmetry), and RR (relative ringiness) values likely lies somewhere in between

the two versions of the maps. Values were calculated for both sets of maps and then

averages for k and MD were taken. Then new RA values were calculated using the
 67
averages. The RA values calculated using the averages will be the values used

for analysis.

Space syntax analysis was conducted on five sites in the Supe Valley (Table

4.3) with RA values ranging from 0.22 to 0.44. The RR values are zero for each site

because no ringiness is present in the distribution pattern. These values are

consistent with the complexity and size of each site and split the five sites into two

groups of spatial complexity. Caral and Era de Pando are the most spatially

segregated sites of the five and sit at opposite ends of the valley. The other three

sites share a more integrated spatial pattern. All of the sites are relatively shallow

with Caral having the greatest mean depth while Lurihuasi has the shallowest depth.

Table 4.1. Supe Valley space syntax values from Shady and Leyva’s (2003) maps.

Supe Valley k MD RA RRA RR

Era de Pando 13 3.2 0.4 1.45 0
Miraya 23 3.1 0.2 0.96 0
Lurihuasi 9 2.1 0.31 0.99 0
Caral 21 4.25 0.34 1.55 0
Alpacoto 10 2.4 0.35 1.14 0

Table 4.2. Supe Valley space syntax values from Zechenter’s (1988) maps.

Supe Valley k MD RA RRA RR

Era de Pando 9 2.75 0.5 1.6 0
Miraya 18 3.01 0.25 1.06 0
Lurihuasi 9 1.88 0.25 0.79 0
Caral 9 2.9 0.54 1.7 0
Alpacoto 4 1 0.3 N/A 0
 68
Table 4.3. Supe Valley average space syntax values.

Supe Valley k MD RA RRA RR

Era de Pando 11 2.98 0.44 1.39 0
Miraya 20.5 3.05 0.22 1.01 0
Lurihuasi 9 1.99 0.28 0.89 0
Caral 15 3.58 0.40 1.53 0
Alpacoto 7 1.7 0.28 0.82 0

Pativilca Valley

Space syntax analysis was conducted on six sites in the Pativilca Valley

(Table 4.4) and all sites had RA values over 0.40, however, two of the sites (Upaca

and Carreteria) had MD values equal, but not greater, than 2 so they are category

three sites. Each of the four category one sites are equally segregated spatially and

all six sites in the valley are non-distributed. As in the Supe Valley all of the sites

are shallow with the highest MD value being 3.1 at Pampa San Jose, the shallowest

sites in the valley are at Upaca and Carreteria.

Table 4.4. Pativilca Valley space syntax values.

Pativilca Valley k MD RA RRA RR

Punta y Suela 10 2.7 0.43 1.4 0
Upaca 4 2 0.5 N/A 0
Pampa San Jose 11 3.1 0.47 1.59 0
Carreteria 4 2 0.5 N/A 0
Vinto Alto 8 2.6 0.53 1.53 0
Huayto 7 2.3 0.52 1.62 0
 69
Fortaleza Valley

Space syntax analysis for the Fortaleza Valley follows the same general

trend found in the other two valleys showing a distinction between two groups of

sites. Caballete and Porvenir have similar RA and values (Table 4.5) and are the

most spatially segregated in the valley while Cerro Lampay, Cerro Blanco 2, and

Shaura share the same values and spatial organization as Upaca and Carreteria in the

Pativilca Valley. These five sites also follow a non-distributed pattern.

Huaricanga is the most spatially unique site in the Norte Chico region based

on RA and RR values (Table 4.5). It is the only site that displays any ringiness

(0.21) and its spatial patterning is unlike any other site in the region. The RA value

for the site is the lowest in the region at 0.17 meaning it is the most spatially

integrated site in the Norte Chico. However, these values may be skewed because

of the destruction of most of the site with the exception of one very large mound and

another smaller mound. All of the sites are spatially shallow with the highest MD

value being 3.8 at Caballete, this is also the highest MD value for the region.

Table 4.5. Fortaleza Valley space syntax values.

Fortaleza k MD RA RRA RR
Valley
Porvenir 8 2.7 0.57 1.7 0
Caballete 15 3.8 0.43 1.6 0
Huaricanga 17 2.31 0.17 0.7 0.21
Cerro Lampay 4 2 0.5 N/A 0
Cerro Blanco 2 4 2 0.5 N/A 0
Shaura 4 2 0.5 N/A 0
 70

Three distinct categories of sites were observed through the space syntax

analysis: 1) sites with MD greater than 2 and RA greater than 0.40 (Table 4.6), 2)

sites with MD less than 2 or RA less than 0.30 (Table 4.7), and 3) sites with MD

equal to 2 and RA equal to 0.50 (Table 4.8). The first category of sites includes all

of the sites that are considered multi-mound sites in the region with the exception of

Miraya, Lurihuasi, and Alpacoto in the Supe Valley which are category two sites

and Huaricanga in the Fortaleza Valley which is an outlier of all categories.

Category three describes the single mound sites in the Pativilca and Fortaleza

Valleys. In Chapter 5 I will discuss the relationship between these categorized sites

on the geographical landscape from a regional perspective.

Table 4.6. Space syntax values for all Category 1 sites.

Valley Site Category Mean RA RR

Depth
Supe Era de Pando 1 2.98 0.44 0
Supe Caral 1 3.58 0.40 0
Pativilca Punta y Suela 1 2.7 0.43 0
Pativilca Pampa San 1 3.1 0.47 0
Jose
Pativilca Vinto Alto 1 2.6 0.53 0
Pativilca Huayto 1 2.3 0.52 0
Fortaleza Porvenir 1 2.7 0.57 0
Fortaleza Caballete 1 3.8 0.43 0
Fortaleza Huaricanga 1 2.31 0.17 0.21
 71
Table 4.7. Space syntax values for all Category 2 sites.

Valley Site Category Mean RA RR

Depth
Supe Lurihuasi 2 1.99 0.28 0
Supe Miraya 2 3.05 0.22 0
Supe Alpacoto 2 1.7 0.28 0

Table 4.8. Space syntax values for all Category 3 sites.

Valley Site Category Mean RA RR

Depth
Pativilca Upaca 3 2 0.50 0
Pativilca Carreteria 3 2 0.50 0
Fortaleza Cerro Lampay 3 2 0.50 0
Fortaleza Cerro Blanco 3 2 0.50 0
2
Fortaleza Shaura 3 2 0.50 0
 CHAPTER 5

REGIONAL ANALYSIS USING THIESSEN POLYGONS

The Thiessen polygon analysis for the Norte Chico region was conducted in

two steps. The first step was the creation of an idealized polygon for the region that

was then divided geographically using all monumental architecture sites from the

region with Late Archaic dates as well sites that are architecturally characteristic of

the Late Archaic period where dates have yet to be collected. The second step was

to create arable land polygons based on Zechenter’s (1988) model (described in

Chapter 1) using aerial photographs (SAN 1943) and not including modern zones of

agricultural that are fed by large irrigation canals for the theoretical reasoning for

constructing the arable land polygons see the end of Chapter 2. Two iterations of

Thiessen polygons were constructed from the arable land polygons: 1) using all

Late Archaic sites in each valley and 2) using the three categories of site level

spatial organization indicated by space syntax analysis.

Supe Valley

The Supe Valley accounts for 868.21 km2 or 41.75% of the idealized

Thiessen polygon for the region (Figs. 5-1 and 5-2) (Table 5.1). Individual site

areas show a fairly large disparity in the areas of possible influence for each site. At
 73
one end of the spectrum, Miraya’s area is only 13.61 km² and accounts for 0.65%

of the entire Norte Chico region, whereas Era de Pando’s area is 279.7 km2 and

accounts for the largest percentage of area for a single site in the entire region at

13.45%.

The Thiessen polygon constructed using the 7.19 km2 of arable land and all

of the Late Archaic sites in the Supe Valley (Fig. 5-5) shows a pattern of descending

land division areas moving eastward into the valley (Table 5.2). Caral is associated

with the smallest area of any site in all of the valleys at 0.49 km2 and a percentage

of 6.83% within its own valley. The largest area of arable land associated with an

individual site in the Supe Valley is Lurihuasi with 2.81 km2 and accounting for

39.07% of the entire area for the Supe Valley.

Table 5.1. Supe Valley idealized Thiessen polygon values for all Late Archaic sites.

All Late Archaic Supe Valley Area (km2) Percentage of the whole
Sites region
Aspero 101.37 4.88
Era de Pando 279.70 13.45
Lurihuasi 128.64 6.19
Miraya 13.61 0.65
Caral 156.44 7.52
Alpacoto 188.45 9.06

The final Thiessen polygon constructed using only Category 1 sites yielded

an almost equal division of the Supe Valley between Era de Pando and Caral (Fig.

5-6). Era de Pando is associated with 3.39 km² of arable land and accounts for

47.17% of the valley’s total area. Caral is associated with 3.79 km² of arable land

and accounts for 52.83% (Table 5.3). The Supe Valley is the only valley with
 74
Category 2 sites. Thiessen polygons show that each of the Category 2 sites fall

within Caral’s territorial boundaries. The inclusion of these sites makes Caral’s area

nine times larger than in the previous arable land Thiessen polygon map including

all Late Archaic sites.

Figure. 5 - 1. Idealized territorial boundaries for all Late Archaic sites in the Norte
Chico region.
 75

Figure. 5 – 2. Supe Valley idealized territorial boundaries for all Late Archaic
sites.
 76

Figure. 5 – 3. Idealized territorial boundaries for all Category 1 sites in the Norte
Chico region.
 77

Figure. 5 – 4. Supe Valley idealized territorial boundaries for Category 1 sites.

 78

Figure. 5 – 5. Supe Valley arable land boundaries for all Late Archaic sites.
 79

Figure. 5 – 6. Supe Valley arable land boundaries for Category 1 sites.

 80
Table 5.2. Supe Valley arable land Thiessen polygon values for all Late Archaic
sites.

All Late Archaic Supe Valley Area (km2) Percentage of the whole
Sites valley
Era de Pando 2.32 32.26
Lurihuasi 2.81 39.07
Miraya 0.96 13.39
Caral 0.49 6.83
Alpacoto 0.61 8.45

Table 5.3. Supe Valley arable land Thiessen polygon values for Category 1 sites.

Category 1 Supe Valley Sites Area (km2) Percentage of the whole

valley
Era de Pando 3.39 47.17
Caral 3.79 52.83

Pativilca Valley

The Pativilca Valley accounts for 499.8 km² or 24.03% of the total area of

the hypothetical regional Thiessen polygon (Figs. 5-1 and 5-7) (Table 5.4). The

largest area associated with an individual site in the Pativilca Valley is 257.12 km²

at Huayto which accounts for 12.37% of the whole Norte Chico region. The

smallest area associated with an individual site in the valley is 11.33 km² at

Carreteria which accounts for 0.54% of the whole region and has the smallest area

of any site regionally.

The arable land Thiessen polygon constructed using the 23.7 km² of arable

land and all of the Late Archaic sites (Fig. 5-9) in the valley shows an equal

distribution of sites in relation to arable land with the exception being the area for
 81
Upaca (Table 5.5). The division of land ranges between 2.42 km² and 4.22 km²

for five of the six sites, but Upaca dominates the valley with an area of 7.28 km²

accounting for 30.68% of the arable land. This disparity is due wholly to the central

location of Upaca in the Pativilca Valley. The site sits between the Pativilca River

proper 1 km to the south and one of its tributaries sitting 1 km to the north which

places it in an advantageous position to maximize the arable land of the Pativilca

River as well as its tributary.

Table 5.4. Pativilca Valley idealized Thiessen polygon values for all Late Archaic
sties.

All Late Archaic Pativilca Area Percentage of the whole

Valley Sites (km2) region
Punta y Suela 71.05 3.42
Upaca 25.49 1.23
Pampa San Jose 33.25 1.59
Carreteria 11.33 0.54
Vinto Alto 101.56 4.88
Huayto 257.12 12.37

Table 5.5. Pativilca Valley arable land Thiessen polygon values for all Late Archaic
sties.

All Late Archaic Pativilca Area Percentage of the whole

Valley Sites (km2) valley
Punta y Suela 2.42 10.2
Upaca 7.28 30.68
Pampa San Jose 3.19 13.46
Carreteria 3.13 13.19
Vinto Alto 3.49 14.69
Huayto 4.22 17.77
 82
Alternatively, the arable land Thiessen polygon constructed focusing only

on the Category 1 sites (Fig. 5-10) resulted in a relatively equal division of land

ranging between 4.22 km² and 7.65 km² (Table 5.6). The two sites with the highest

RA values (Vinto Alto and Pampa San Jose) also had the largest areas in the valley.

The area for Huayto did not change from the Thiessen polygon map that included all

of the Late Archaic sites to this iteration of the map. The only difference is that it

went from being the second largest site in area to the smallest. It is unclear as to

why this occurs with Huayto but it is most likely due to the nature of the arable land

polygon and Huayto’s geographical placement which is not central in the valley

relative to the other sites. Huayto is also not associated with a Category 3 site that is

centrally placed.

Table 5.6. Pativilca Valley arable land Thiessen polygon values for Category 1
sites.

Category 1 Pativilca Valley Area (km²) Percentage of the whole

Sites valley
Punta y Suela 5.31 22.37
Pampa San Jose 6.55 27.62
Vinto Alto 7.65 32.24
Huayto 4.22 17.77

Fortaleza Valley

The Fortaleza Valley accounts for 711.26 km² or 34.21% of the total area for

the idealized regional polygon (Figs. 5-1 and 5-11) (Table 5.7). The largest area for

any one site is that of Huaricanga with an area of 182.53 km2 which accounts for
 83

Figure. 5 – 7. Pativilca Valley idealized territorial boundaries for all Late Archaic
sites.
 84

Figure. 5 – 8. Pativilca Valley idealized territorial boundaries for Category 1 sites.

 85

Figure. 5 – 9. Pativilca Valley arable land boundaries for all Late Archaic sites.
 86

Figure. 5 – 10. Pativilca Valley arable land boundaries for Category 1 sites.
 87

Figure. 5 – 11. Fortaleza Valley idealized territorial boundaries for all Late Archaic
sites.
 88

Figure. 5 – 12. Fortaleza Valley idealized territorial boundaries for Category 1

sites.
 89

Figure. 5 – 13. Fortaleza Valley arable land boundaries for all Late Archaic sites.
 90

Figure. 5 – 14. Fortaleza Valley arable land boundaries for Category 1 sites.
 91
8.78% of the area for the entire Norte Chico region. The cluster of four sites

sitting in the SW portion of the valley (Porvenir, Cerro Lampay, Caballete, Cerro

Blanco 2) have relatively similar areas.

The Thiessen polygon constructed using the 20.99 km² of arable land and all

of the Late Archaic sites (5-13) in the valley shows a division of land that trends

upwards in area from Porvenir to Huaricanga (0.52 km² to 7.12 km²) and then trends

back down from Huaricanga to Shaura (7.12 km² to 0.84 km²) (Table 5.8). Cerro

Lampay (1.57 km²), which is a single mound site, has an area three times the size of

Porvenir’s (0.52 km²). Another single mound site, Cerro Blanco 2 (4.17 km²) has

nine times the area of Porvenir and is also larger than Caballete (3.69 km²).

The final arable land Thiessen polygon (5-14) divided the Fortaleza Valley

into three areas of land that trend from small to large areas the further east and north

up the river valley (Table 5.9). Porvenir has the smallest area at 1.82 km2 which

accounts for only 8.68% of the valley’s area. Caballete has an area of 7.49 km²

accounting for 35.69% of the valley and Huaricanga has an area of 11.67 km²

accounting for 55.63%. Though Huaricanga is the most spatially integrated of all

sites in the region, its geographical position places it in a location that has the largest

area of arable land available to it according to the calculations of the Thiessen

polygons. Huaricanga was included as a category one site because of its size and

age relative to the other sites in the region.

 92
Table 5.7. Fortaleza Valley arable land Thiessen polygon values for all Late
Archaic Sites.

All Late Archaic Fortaleza Area (km²) Percentage of the whole

Valley Sites region
Bermejo 100.72 4.84
Porvenir 50.02 2.41
Cerro Lampay 33.09 1.59
Caballete 54.82 2.64
Cerro Blanco 2 81.34 3.91
Huaricanga 182.53 8.78
Cerro de la Cruz 67.77 3.26
Shaura 140.97 6.78

As discussed in Chapter 2, the arable land polygons provide a more plausible

theoretical basis for understanding land division among the inland sites within their

own valleys. However, the actual boundary divisions for each site did not change

from the initial idealized polygons to the arable land polygons because the

geographical location does not change, only the boundaries within which the

Thiessen polygons were constructed changes. The only difference is the area of land

associated with each site, which is to be expected. It was also expected that some of

the Category 2 and 3 sites would have more arable land associated with them than

some of the Category 1 sites because they had more land associated with them in the

idealized polygon. However, it was unexpected that such an equal distribution of

land in each valley and regionally would exist. This equal distribution indicates an

equal distribution of sites on the landscape and shows that a pattern exists in the

region as opposed to being randomly distributed.

 93
Table 5.8. Fortaleza Valley arable land Thiessen polygon values for all Late
Archaic sites.

All Late Archaic Fortaleza Area (km2) Percentage of the whole

Valley Sites valley
Porvenir 0.52 2.41
Cerro Lampay 1.57 7.48
Caballete 3.69 17.60
Cerro Blanco 2 4.17 19.87
Huaricanga 7.12 33.91
Cerro de la Cruz 3.08 14.65
Shaura 0.84 6.78

Table 5.9. Fortaleza Valley arable land Thiessen polygon values for Category 1
sites.

Category one Fortaleza Valley Area Percentage of the whole

Sites (km2) valley
Porvenir 1.82 8.68
Caballete 7.49 35.69
Huaricanga 11.67 55.63

Table 5.10. Division of arable land among all Category 1 sites in the region.

Valley Site Area (km2) Percentage of all Valleys

Supe Era de Pando 3.39 7.3
Supe Caral 3.79 8.1
Pativilca Punta y Suela 5.26 11.2
Pativilca Pampa San Jose 2.40 5.1
Pativilca Vinto Alto 5.09 10.9
Pativilca Huayto 5.74 12.3
Fortaleza Porvenir 1.82 3.9
Fortaleza Caballete 7.49 16.1
Fortaleza Huaricanga 11.67 25

Thiessen polygon analysis for arable land in the region shows a clear pattern

of relatively equal land distribution among the Category 1 sites, both in their
 94
respective valleys and on the regional scale, with the exception of the Fortaleza

Valley which will be discussed in further detail in Chapter 6 (Table 5.10). There is a

definitive relationship between Category 1 and Category 2 and 3 sites both in

architectural design as well as geographically in that once the arable land polygons

were constructed with only the geographic points for Category 1 sites it became

clear that the Category 2 and 3 sites related to the Category 1 sites had better

strategic placement to maximize the available arable land in each valley.

 CHAPTER 6

INTERPRETATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

The initial hypotheses for this research were clearly and succinctly born out

in both analyses. There is in fact a pattern of spatial distribution that is equivalent at

each site, there is a pattern of land distribution that is equal among all Category 1

sites in the region, and the interpretation of the space syntax analysis shows a clear

pattern of social hierarchy at the individual site level. As discussed in Chapter 1,

the interpretations and conclusions for this research are synchronic in nature. It is

outside the scope of this research as it is currently constructed to understand what is

happening in the Norte Chico region diachronically. Instead, this research is

intended to construct a snapshot of what sociopolitical organization and land

distribution would have been like ca. 2200 B.C. Each of the aforementioned

conclusions will be discussed within this synchronic framework.

The interpretation of space syntax from a regional perspective shows an

average relative asymmetry (RA) value falling around 0.47. According to Hillier

and Hanson’s (1984) scale for RA values, many of these sites possess an equal share

of “exclusivity” and integration. The 0 value for relative ringiness (RR) at each site

suggests a spatially segregated distribution pattern at these sites which simply

means that each space within these structures is controlled by another space,

movement within the sites would be controlled. This conclusion is not necessarily
 96
consistent with the RA values for the sites. When a site has an RR value of 0 one

would expect RA values closer to 1. However, the Norte Chico sites fall in the

middle of the range of values produced by space syntax analysis. A closer

investigation of site design in the Norte Chico region provides an insight into the

disparity between the RR and RA values (see Tables 4.6, 4.7, and 4.8).

The symmetry (accessibility) of the site layout shows a pattern of

“openness” to the outside world in the form of the large square plaza, or in the case

of the smaller mounds, the natural landscape. This “openness” is most likely a

manifestation of a desire to show community unity and strength to the outside world

(Vega-Centeno 2005). This aspect of design should indicate a number approaching

zero (highly accessible) for relative aysmmetry. However, once one enters the plaza,

space becomes more and more restricted as one walks toward the raised square

plazas, the sunken circular plazas, and eventually the atrium of the platform mound

indicating an expectation of relative asymmetry values approaching one (highly

isolated). The combination of the two levels of site design, with more restriction of

space the deeper one goes into the site, explains the middle range RA values.

Nondistributedness indicated by the 0 values for RR indicates that restriction of

movement occurs through what seems to be a planned mode of entry into each site

as well as into individual structures within the site.

The idealized Thiessen polygons for the Norte Chico region based on

Renfrew’s (1986) peer polity analysis produced some unexpected results (see Tables

5.1, 5.4, and 5.7). These results can be attributed to the fact that the boundaries for

the region were hypothetical and that territorial boundaries covered areas of land
 97
that most likely were uninhabited or at least sparsely populated (e.g. coastal

mountains, quebradas). Some of the multi-mound sites in the region (e.g. Porvenir,

Caballete) were associated with smaller areas of idealized land division than some

of the single mound sites (e.g. Cerro Blanco 2, Shaura). Despite this, a pattern

emerged. For example, in the Pativilca Valley sites were relatively evenly

distributed geographically. This even geographic distribution was also apparent for

four sites in the Fortaleza Valley (Porvenir, Cerro Lampay, Caballete, Cerro Blanco

2). The pattern of even geographic distribution continued from the larger idealized

polygons into the more plausible arable land polygons. The significance of this

continuing pattern is that the sites were not only evenly distributed geographically,

but seemingly evenly distributed in prime locations to maximize arable land.

Almost every Category 1 site in the region has a Category 2 or 3 site

associated with it. The association of these sites to the Category 1 sites is

manifested in at least one of two ways: 1) similar spatial patterning between the

Category 1 and Category 2 or 3 sites and/or 2) a significant increase in area of

arable land for the Category 1 site when the Category 2 or 3 site falls within its

boundaries. Only, three sites in the region do not have a Category 2 or 3 sites

associated with them, Huayto and Vinto Alto in the Pativilca Valley and Era de

Pando in the Supe Valley. Each of these sites has something that distinguishes it

from the other sites within their respective valleys. Huayto is the only site in the

region that sits on a ridge top (Creamer et al. 2007), Vinto Alto is the largest site by

volume in the region (197,292 m3) (Haas and Creamer 2006), and Era de Pando has

a larger site area (79.74 ha) than any other site in the Supe Valley (Shady 2006).
 98
These distinctions may be the result of a different strategy of competition based

on placing all of the construction focus on the main or central site rather than using

energy to construct satellite sites.

Caral is the only site that has more than one Category 2 or 3 sites associated

with it (see Fig. 5-6). Interestingly, the sites associated with Caral are Category 2

sites which are not found anywhere else the region. When grouped with Caral these

sites help to substantially increase the amount of arable land associated with Caral.

The relationship between Category 1 and Category 2 or 3 sites in all of the valleys

suggests a strategic positioning of Category 2 or 3 sites in relationship to Category 1

sites in order to maximize arable land within an area or define territorial boundaries

(see Figs. 5-10 and 5-14).

The RA values associated with the Category 2 sites in the Supe Valley do

not follow the patterning observed in the rest of the region. Part of the reason for

this may have to do with the available arable land in the valley. Since the Supe

Valley has one-third of the arable land present in each of the other two valleys, the

relatively high integration of space at Lurihuasi, Miraya, and Alpacoto seems

reasonable. The limited arable land in the valley may correlate with the presence of

more integrated sites because the sites may have been constructed as a competitive

device to bring more resources into the resource-poor Supe Valley. Also notable in

the Supe Valley is that the average RA value for the entire valley falls far below that

of the other valleys. This is partly due to the Category 2 sites just discussed, but

even though Era de Pando and Caral distinguish themselves architecturally in the
 99
valley they are still more integrated spatially (easily accessible) than some of their

contemporaries to the north.

The greatest argument for equality in spatial organization and territorial

boundaries lies in the Pativilca Valley. Each of the Category 1 sites shares a

relatively equivalent division of land as well as relatively equivalent RA values.

The RA value for each site is directly correlated to the area of arable land for each

site, with the exception of Huayto. As RA values rise, so do the areas of arable land

for each site. Also, when determining the carrier space for each of these sites it

became apparent that they each shared a particular type of construction that

controlled entry into the site. The sites of Punta y Suela, Pampa San Jose, and Vinto

Alto each had main mounds that were steep sided on the façade opposite the central

plaza and Huayto is the only site that is built on a natural rise of any consequence in

any valley. This type of construction seems to delineate controlled access. This

controlled access was born out in the space syntax data as three of these four sites

are some of the most segregated spatially in the region.

The Fortaleza Valley is the most difficult to assess based on the numbers

from both the space syntax analysis and the Thiessen polygon models. Porvenir is

the most spatially segregated in the region yet the area of arable land associated with

it is the smallest in any valley. Huaricanga is the most spatially integrated of any

site in the region and the area of land that it is associated with is the largest.

Caballete and its associated Category 3 site, Cerro Blanco 2, sit in the center of the

valley and fit the pattern described for the other valleys.
 100
The spatial segregation at Porvenir is mitigated by site design. Whereas

Caballete is constructed in the same way as the sites in the Pativilca Valley and

Caral, where access is controlled by design, Porvenir sits with its back and arms

buttressed by coastal mountains and the plaza opening out into the fields below it.

The segregation at Porvenir occurs at the level of entrance into the sunken circular

plaza and mound. At this level, segregation is the same at all of the sites in the

region. Rather than a strict design of entry into the site, Porvenir displays an

“openness” to the river valley that is not present at the other Category 1 sites with

the exception of Era de Pando. There is no architectural evidence to suggest a

design for controlled access into the main plaza area. Porvenir and Era de Pando are

the only Category 1 sites that follow this pattern and their areas of associated land

are the smallest in the region.

Huaricanga is the only site in the region that does not fit into one of the three

defined categories and its area of associated arable land is the largest by 3 km² of

any site in the region. There are several possibilities for this result. Because the

space syntax analysis is dependent on site maps there are problems when dealing

with a site that is partially destroyed. Huaricanga is the only site tested that sits

beside the Pan American Highway in Peru. This proximity to the highway has led

to many historic disturbances of the site. Huaricanga’s plaza is also a modern stone

quarry leading to massive site destruction, especially in what would have been one

of the main open plazas (Haas and Ruiz 2004). There is also an Initial Period site

sitting about 100 m to the west of the Late Archaic component. The Initial Period

reoccupation may have also led to some destruction of the Late Archaic component.
 101
It is unique for a Late Archaic monument to be sitting so close to an

Initial Period monument and this choice of geographical location for both sites may

provide an insight as to why the site at Huaricanga has so much land associated with

it. The Initial Period site at Huaricanga is the most highly organized in what Vega-

Centeno (1998) describes as the Middle Fortaleza Valley. Each of the Late Archaic

sites fall within this area of the valley and Huaricanga sits in a central position

between Cerro de la Cruz and Shaura to the northeast and the rest of the Late

Archaic sites to the southwest. The land that sits directly to the north and south of

Huaricanga is a narrow geographical strip that is canyon in some parts and is not as

broad as the arable land adjacent to Caballete and Porvenir. This geographical

positioning of the site, and the later Initial Period site, may have been a strategic

placement to attract people coming up valley, as well as people coming down

valley. If this is the case, then the integration of space begins to make sense.

Huaricanga would have been built for access from both sides.

There is also the possibility that Cerro de la Cruz and/or Shaura could fit the

description of what is being termed a Category 1 site in this research. Haas and

Creamer (2006) note that there may have been larger mounds at Shaura that have

since been destroyed and little information about Cerro de la Cruz is known. If one

or both of these sites were of the same size and magnitude as the other sites in the

Norte Chico then Huaricanga’s share of land, while still the largest in the valley,

drops somewhat.
 102
Space Syntax, Socio-Political Organization and the Archaeological Record

As has been suggested above, the Norte Chico region shows a strong pattern

of equal levels of spatial integration and segregation at the individual site level.

According to the space syntax analysis there are nine Category 1 (see Table 5.10)

sites that should be considered as the nine central nodes of power within the region.

Each of these nine power centers is associated with a relatively equal amount of

arable land, particularly compared with other sites within its own valley, and

possible reasons for outliers have already been discussed. A true assessment of the

validity of the results from this research can only be reached by viewing them

within the context of the archaeological research from the region.

As discussed in chapter 2, Shady’s work at Caral (Shady et al. 2001; Shady

and Leyva 2003; Shady 2006) has led her to the conclusion that there was a Caral-

Supe state in the Norte Chico region during the latter part of the Late Archaic.

Shady’s argument focuses on the architectural similarities (sunken circular plazas,

platform mounds, U-shaped complexes) of sites in the region as well as Caral’s

“centrality” in the region as two of the many reasons Caral was the capital city of a

“pristine state.” She also contends that the density and complexity of sites within

the Supe Valley as well as the architectural complexity of Caral itself show that the

Supe Valley was the locus for this state.

There is no doubt that Caral and the sites in the Supe Valley share many of

the same architectural characteristics as those in the other two valleys. In fact,

taking similar size and design of architectural features out of the equation, space
 103
syntax shows that Caral and Era de Pando follow the exact same patterning of

spatial organization as all but four of the multi-mound sites in the region. Three of

those sites are in the Supe Valley (Lurihuasi, Miraya, Alpacoto). Thiessen polygons

indicate that those three sites fall within Caral’s territorial boundaries.

As mentioned earlier, the Supe Valley, on average, has the lowest RA values

for any valley in the region. In conjunction with the small area of arable land in the

valley, these values suggest a desire to build sites that are readily accessible to

outsiders. Because arable land was sparse in the Supe Valley in relation to the other

two valleys it stands to reason that Caral and the related sites in the valley would

have been focused on constructing many more architectural complexes than their

contemporaries to the north. The polities within the Supe Valley would be

expressing power and expanding inter-valley territorial boundaries through

architecture in order to compete for outside resources to bolster their relatively small

resource base. The integration values for these sites suggests a need to show greater

community cohesion to outsiders whether it existed or not because the possibility

for resource procurement within Caral’s own valley would have much more difficult

than that of the other two valleys.

The fact that the most integrated sites in the region sit in the valley with the

least access to arable land is telling. Caral’s association with three relatively highly

integrated sites in its valley suggests at least one of two things: 1) there is either an

alliance between Caral and these three sites in order to maximize arable land, or 2)

the inhabitants, or groups associated directly with Caral, are constructing these

monuments in order to maximize access to arable land for Caral. This same
 104
argument can be made for five of the other eight centers of power within the

region; however, the sites associated with those other five centers share an

equivalent value of asymmetry.

Kolb and Snead (1997) describe a similar phenomenon in the Tsikiwaiye

community in the Northern Rio Grande. Kolb and Snead defined the Tsikiwaiye

community as one that was socio-politically centered rather than driven by

economics. This assessment was based on the abundance of festive architecture

(suprafamily architectural or agricultural projects organized within the community

or by low-level elites with labor exchanged for food, prestige or security) which was

not given over to large-scale irrigation (Kolb and Snead 1997:613-620). Kolb and

Snead further conclude that labor investment in the Tsikiwaiye community was

directed toward the construction of festive architecture and that subsistence would

have only been a priority on the family level.

In a final discussion of the implications of their data on the Tsikiwaiye

community Kolb and Snead (1997) state:

The idea that any community-level labor organization was being placed into shrines
before it went into field systems has far-reaching implications for the aggregation
process…[I]ncreasing investment in symbolic boundary maintenance in local Early
Classic communities may reflect increased competition between groups, possibly
over access to agricultural land, occurring before the intensification of production
indicated by investment in formal field systems. (623)

The assumption is that once competition for arable land came to the forefront of

importance for these groups, larger groups began to aggregate with smaller groups

and construction of architecture continued as they began to identify and compete

over land boundaries.

 105
While it seems likely that the rest of the Norte Chico region was

following a similar scenario as the one described by Kolb and Snead, the pattern

they describe is most readily evident in the Supe Valley. The paucity of arable land

in the Supe Valley relative to the rest of the region may have forced aggregation at

an earlier time than in the rest of the region. The spatial organization at Alpacoto,

Lurihuasi, and Miraya is different than at any of the other sites in the region, this

may be a result of constant construction and/or remodeling without any set pattern

of organization. The density of construction in the Supe Valley in light of Kolb and

Snead’s (1997) hypothesis would not be due to an individual “pristine” state

extending its boundaries, but a polity and smaller set of communities desperately

trying to compete with their contemporaries in the region. Era de Pando at the

western end of the valley may not have had the same problems as the other sites as

it sits closer to the ocean with presumably easier access to marine resources.

A peer polity model for the region has been discussed by two separate

groups of researchers within the region (Creamer et al. 2006; Haas and Creamer

2006; Vega-Centeno 2005). There are subtle but important differences in the two

versions of the model put forth. Vega-Centeno (2005) contends that each site in the

region (Category 1, 2, and 3 in this research) shares a similar architectural design

that suggests communities negotiated positions of power through ritual practices.

The suggestion is that the design of the sites within the region is based on a desire to

show community cohesiveness and power to the outside world while controlling

power within the community, but that there is no evidence for a hierarchical social

structure. Haas and Creamer (2006) contend that site size and the small area of
 106
permanent residential architecture in relation to public architecture at these large

sites suggest groups of high status individuals living at these sites and competition

for outside resources at the individual site level as well as the regional level.

Vega-Centeno’s (2005) argument is based on the same space syntax analysis

that was conducted for this research. He suggests that the square plaza and sunken

circular plaza at Cerro Lampay are the features open to outsiders and that

community control over power is manifested in the equal access to smaller rooms at

the back of the mound structure. The conclusion that sites were constructed in order

to show community cohesiveness to outsiders, thus making a ritual center seem

powerful to outsiders supplying resources, is a valid interpretation in light of this

research. When considering Vega-Centeno’s (2005) interpretation that rooms

attached to the complex were readily accessible by all members of the community

within the context of the small size of Cerro Lampay, the interpretation is valid to an

extent. However, Vega-Centeno (2005) assumes that because there is equal access

there is no evidence for social hierarchy. What he does not consider it that

inhabitants of the site may have been high status individuals at the top of a territorial

social hierarchy that included larger sites with associated satellites.

Excavations at Caral (Shady and Leyva 2003; Shady 2006) and Caballete

(Haas and Ruiz 2006) have found permanent domestic structures that are considered

elite domestic residences. The only housing attributed to lower status individuals, to

date, are quincha huts that were found within 1 km of the main ritual site at

Caballete (Haas and Ruiz 2004). This suggests that only the elite within a society

lived permanently at these sites. If this is true, then Vega-Centeno’s (2005)

 107
interpretation has a different significance than the one he originally presents.

There are also permanent housing structures located behind Cerro Lampay which

Vega-Centeno (2005) considers community dwellings giving equal access to the

rooms behind the mound. In the context of other sites in the region it would seem

that these permanent structures were for high status individuals only. Vega-Centeno

(2005) does not mention finding temporary housing structures.

Following the idea that only high status individuals lived at these sites, the

RA values for the sites take on further meaning. Assuming the inhabitants were high

status individuals only, Vega-Centeno’s idea that a certain section of a site was

meant to attract people while another section was meant to conduct rituals and

provide equal access to inhabitants of the site can be fleshed out with this analysis.

The average RA value of 0.47 for eight of the Category 1 sites (excluding

Huaricanga) shows an in-site distinction between inhabitants and outsiders. The

inhabitants would have wanted to attract outsiders into their ritual center, but RA

values and nondistributedness indicate that there would have been restrictions on

entry into the deepest part of the site.

The higher integration values Vega-Centeno (2005) calculated for Cerro

Lampay tend to strengthen the case for the Category 1 and Category 3 site

association discovered in this research because it shows a clear distinction from the

power centers to the satellite sites. This distinction may indicate a site hierarchy

where the smaller site is presided over by a lower status group in comparison to the

larger or Category 1 site. Without its association with Cerro Lampay, Porvenir

would have an area three times less than it has when associated with Cerro Lampay.
 108
This is a significant trend throughout the region. A closer look at these

associations along with size and radiocarbon dating indicates that the smaller sites

(Category 2 or 3) were built later, and in the case of Cerro Lampay, in less

construction episodes. This relationship between RA values, area of arable land,

site size, and radiocarbon dating again suggests that the smaller sites were satellites

to the larger sites in the region (Table 6.1).

Between radiocarbon dating, discovery of permanent high status residences,

and the similar spatial patterns and arable land divisions discovered through this

research a clear picture of the socio-political structure for the Norte Chico region at

the end of the Late Archaic emerges. With no evidence of warfare (Haas and

Creamer 2006; Vega-Centeno 2005), the inhabitants of the major power centers in

each valley would have been competing for the resources provided not only by

coastal fisherman, but also by the people within their own valleys (Haas and

Creamer 2006). Radiocarbon dates within the context of the spatial and Thiessen

polygon analyses further shows that as these power centers grew larger, satellite

sites were placed in strategic geographical areas that helped to maximize the area of

arable land the could be influenced by the larger sites.

Table 6.1. Average cal. Radiocarbon dates from all Category 1 and Category 2 and
3 sites in the Norte Chico region (Shady et al. 2001; Shady 2006; Haas et al. 2004;
Vega-Centeno 2005).

Average cal. Radiocarbon Dates

Category 1 Sites 2405.44
Category 2 and 3 Sites 2276.67
 109
Not all of the centers of power are equal in terms of site design, spatial

organization, or territorial influence over arable land. Two (Era de Pando and

Porvenir) of the three sites that were constructed differently than the others as far as

accessibility is concerned were also built in relatively poor geographical position to

maximize the most arable land. It may be unfair to put Era de Pando into the same

category as Porvenir since it is located in a valley with very little arable land and

shares a relatively equal division with Caral, but Era de Pando is a different site

architecturally than Caral. Both of these sites also happen to sit at the furthest

western extent of their respective valleys. Their geographical positioning may have

more to do with accessibility to the coast than with maximizing arable land. Their

access patterns and difference in site design may also be consistent with providing

easier site access to outsiders in order to compete with the other power centers in the

region because they had poorer strategic geographical placement to maximize arable

land.

Huaricanga is the third site that has extreme differences from the others but

it is likely that the site was built this way for reason, namely to compete for those

people moving up and down the Fortaleza Valley. Huaricanga is also in somewhat

of a hinterland in the region and possibly would have been reliant on being a well-

integrated and large site in order to be welcoming as well as impressive.

The Norte Chico power centers did not control geographical territories the

size and breadth of which would fit Renfrew’s (1986) idealized model for peer

polity socio-political organization. However, Renfrew’s (1986) model does not take

geographical constraints into account. A refined model for the Norte Chico region,
 110
focusing solely on territorial influence over arable land, shows a relatively equal

distribution of land within the river valleys for all of the power centers. The six

sites (Caral, Punta y Suela, Pampa San Jose, Vinto Alto, Huayto, Caballete) that

have the same design elements (e.g. steep-sided facades, use of natural rises to

control access) fall into an RA value range of 0.40 to 0.53 and a Thiessen polygon

area range of 3.79 km2 to 7.65 km2. These six sites are basically equivalent based

on the numbers from this research and constitute the basis for what could have been

a peer polity form of social organization. The other three sites fit as power centers

as well, though their geographical positioning and site design may have been based

on different means to an end. The results indicate a peer polity socio-political

organization with an existent social hierarchy manifested through site design and

geographical placement of sites.

Conclusions

The results, in conjunction with continuing archaeological investigation,

suggest peer polity socio-political organization in the Norte Chico region at or

around 2200 B.C. Nine central polities, six of which have smaller or more spatially

integrated complexes associated with them make up the locus of this organization.

The association of the larger sites with the smaller sites may be an indication of

community aggregation at the end of the Late Archaic period as demand for arable

land became more important. The results also suggest the presence of social

hierarchy at individual sites based on the restricted access to the atrium of the
 111
mound structures, but also a pattern of spatial organization that was meant to

draw people in through a display of unity among the community as well as power.

Space syntax analysis and Thiessen polygon analysis provide an exploratory

and theoretical framework through which the Norte Chico region can be further

studied. Initial results in conjunction with radiocarbon dates and little excavation in

the region show a pattern of spatial organization of sites as well as a pattern of

geographical orientation and association between larger and smaller sites in order to

maximize territorial influence over arable land. Both analyses are a simplistic way

to determine spatial patterning of individual sites in the same time period as well as

geographical patterning.

Unfortunately it is difficult to assess the value of either analysis without

further excavation of the sites in the Norte Chico. However, this does not mean that

these finding are not important to the present understanding of the region. The

pattern of spatial organization implies that these sites were contemporaries and the

Thiessen polygons provide insight as to the possibilities for different design

elements at the individual site level. This analysis can only provide basis for future

research in the region, in order to further test the conclusions here, many more dates

and much more investigation through excavation is required.

Thoughts for Further Research

Each of the conclusions garnered from this research could be more

thoroughly tested in several different ways. While the radiocarbon dating and

chronologies for the larger mound structures in the region is exemplary in

 112
comparison to other regions of the world, the smaller sites have gone relatively

untouched. Better knowledge of the relationships between these large and small

sites could be gained with more extensive radiocarbon dating and excavation of the

smaller mound sites. A better understanding of the construction episodes at both the

large and small sites would also provide an insight into the chronological

relationships between the sites in the region.

Another significant area of research would be to more clearly define what

should be considered arable and not arable in the Norte Chico region during the Late

Archaic period. The arable land polygons for this research were constructed using

aerial photographs from the region, but interdisciplinary studies between

archaeologists and geologists in geomorphology as well as remote sensing could

give a better indication as to what those land boundaries might have been.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Billman, B.
2001 Understanding the Timing and Tempo of the Evolution of Political
Centralization on the Central Andean Coastline and Beyond. In
From Leaders to Rulers (J. Haas, ed.):177-204. Kluwer
Academics/Plenum Publishers, New York.

Bradley, B.
1993 Planning, growth, and functional differentiation at a Prehistoric
Pueblo: A case study from SW Colorado. Journal of Field
Archaeology 20:23-42.

Burger, R.
1985 Concluding remarks: Early Peruvian civilization and its relation to
the Chavin Horizon. In Early Ceremonial Architecture in the Andes
(C. Donnan, ed.):269-289. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and
Collection, Washington, D.C.

Bustard, W.
1996 Space as Place: Small and Great House Spatial Organization in
Chaco Canyon, New Mexico, A.D. 1000-1150. Unpublished Ph.D.
dissertation, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque. UMI
Dissertation Services, Ann Arbor, MI.

Castri, J.
1979 Connectivity, Complexity, and Catastrophe in Large Scale Systems.
John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.

Cavallaro, R.
1991 Large-Site Methodology: Architectural Analysis and Dual
Organization in the Andes. Occasional Papers, no. 5, Department of
Anthropology, University of Calgary, Alberta, CN.

Chun, T.
2003 Preceramic Circular Plazas in the Norte Chico, Peru. Unpublished
M.A. thesis, Anthropology Department, Northern Illinois University,
DeKalb, IL.
 114
Cooper, L.
1995 Space Syntax Analysis of Chacoan Great Houses. Unpublished
Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Arizona, Tuscon.

Creamer, W., A. Ruiz and J. Haas

2006 Late Archaic Regional Organization in the Norte Chico. Paper
presented at the 71st Annual meeting for the Society of American
Archaeology in San Juan, Puerto Rico, April 26-30.

2007 Archaeological Investigation of Late Archaic Sites (3000-1800 B.C.)

in The Pativilca Valley, Peru. Fieldiana New Series, No. 40.

Dillehay, T., H. Eling, Jr. and J. Rossen

2005 Preceramic irrigation canals in the Peruvian Andes. PNAS vol. 102
no. 47:17241-17244.

Dillehay, T., J. Rossen, T. Andres, and D. Williams

2007 Preceramic Adoption of Peanut, Squash, and Cotton in Northern
Peru. Science 29:1890-1893.

Donnan, C.B., ed.

1985 Early Ceremonial Architecture in the Andes. Dumbarton Oaks
Research and Collection, Washington, DC.

Engel, F.
1967 Le Complexe Preceramique d’El Paraiso (Perou). Journal de al
Societe Des Americanistes 55:43-96.

Feldman, R.
1980 Aspero, Peru: Architecture, Subsistence Economy and Other
Artifacts of a Preceramic Maritime Chiefdom. Unpublished Ph.D.
dissertation Harvard University, Cambridge.

1985 Preceramic corporate architecture: Evidence for the development of

nonegalitarian social systems in Peru. In Early Ceremonial
Architecture in the Andes (C. Donnan, ed.):71-92. Dumbarton Oaks
Research Library and Collection, Washington, DC.

1987 Architectural evidence for the development of nonegalitarian social

systems in coastal Peru. In The Origins and Development of the
Andean State (J. Haas, S. Pozorski and T. Pozorski eds.):9-14.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
 115
Ferguson, T.
1996 Historic Zuni Architecture and Society: An Archaeological
Application of Space Syntax. Anthropological Papers of the
University of Arizona No. 60. University of Arizona Press, Tuscon.

Fried, M.
1960 On the Evolution of Social Stratification and the State. In Culture in
History (S. Diamond, ed.):713-731. Columbia University Press,
New York.

1967 The Evolution of Political Society: An essay in Political

Anthropology. Random House, New York.

Fung, R.P.
1988 The Late Preceramic and Initial Period. In Peruvian Prehistory (R.
Keatinge ed.):67-96. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Grieder, T., et al.

1988 La Galgada: A Preceramic Culture in Transition. University of
Texas Press, Austin.

Grieder, T. and A.B. Mendoza

1985 Ceremonial Architecture at La Galgada. In Early Ceremonial
Architecture in the Andes (C. Donnan, ed.):93-109. Dumbarton Oaks
Research and Collection, Washington, DC.

Haas, J.
1982 The Evolution of the Prehistoric State. Columbia University Press,
New York.

2001a Cultural Evolution and Political Centralization. In From Leaders to

Rulers (J. Haas, ed.):3-18. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers,
New York.

2001b editor, From Leaders to Rulers. Kluwer Academic/Plenum

Publishers, New York.

Haas, J., W. Creamer and A. Ruiz

2004 Dating the Late Archaic Occupation of the Norte Chico Region in
Peru. Nature 432:1020-1023.

Haas, J. and W. Creamer

2006 The Crucible of Andean Civilization. Current Anthropology 47:745-
775. With CA Comment.
 116

Haas, J. and A. Ruiz

2003 Proyecto de Investigacion Arqueologica en el Norte Chico: Valle de
Fortaleza, Peru. Informe Final Insituto de Cultura, Lima, Peru.

Hillier, B. and J. Hanson

1984 The social logic of space. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Hillier, B., A. Leaman, P. Stansall, and M. Bedford

1976 Space Syntax. Environment and Planning B 3:147-185.

Klymyshyn, A.
1987 The development of Chimu administration in Chan Chan. In The
Origins and Development of the Andean State (J. Haas, S. Pozorski,
and T. Pozorski, eds.):97-110. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.

Kolata, A.
1990 The urban concept of Chan Chan. In The Northern Dynasties:
Kingship and Statecraft in Chimor (M. Moseley and K. Day,
eds.):107-144. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection,
Washington, DC.

Kolb, M.
1994 Monumentality and the rise of religious authority in precontact
Hawai’i. Current Anthropology 35:521-547.

Kolb, M. and J. Snead

1997 It’s a Small World after All: Comparative Analyses of Community
Organization in Archaeology. American Antiquity 62:609-628.

Leach, E.
1978 Does Space Syntax really Constitute the Social. In Social
Organization and Settlement: Contributions from Anthropology, pg.
385-401. British Archaeological Reports, International Series. vol.
471, Oxford.

Moore, J.D
1992 Pattern and meaning in Prehistoric Peruvian architecture: The
architecture of social control in the Chimu state. Latin American
Antiquity 3:95-113.

1996 Architecture and Power in the Ancient Andes. Cambridge University

Press, Cambridge.
 117

Moseley, M.
1975 Maritime Foundations of Andean Civilization. Cummings, Menlo
Park, CA.

1985 The exploration and explanation of early monumental architecture in

the Andes. In Early Ceremonial Architecture in the Andes (C.
Donnan ed.):29-58. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and
Collection, Washington, DC.

1992 Maritime foundations and multilinear evolution: Retrospect and

prospect. Andean Past 3:5-42.

Moseley, M. and G. Willey

1973 Aspero, Peru: A reexamination of the site and its implications.
American Antiquity 38:452-468.

Potter, J.
1998 The Structure of Open Space in Late Prehistoric Settlements in the
Southwest. In Migration and Reorganization: The Pueblo IV Period
in the American Southwest (K. Spielmann, ed.):137-153.
Anthropological Research Papers 51. Arizona State University,
Tempe.

Price, Barbara J.
1977 Shifts in Production and Organization: A Cluster-Interaction Model.
Current Anthropology 18:209-233. With CA comments.

Quilter, J.
1985 Architecture and chronology at El Paraiso. Journal of Field
Archaeology 12:279-297.

Quilter, J. and T. Stocker.

1983 Subsistence economies and the origins of Andean complex societies.
American Anthropologist, New Series, 85:545-562.

Renfrew, C.
1986 Introduction: peer polity interaction and socio-political change. In
Peer polity interaction and socio-political change (C. Renfrew and
J.F. Cherry eds.):1-18. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Rowe, J.
1963 Urban settlement in Ancient Peru. Nawpa Pacha 1:1-28.
 118
Service, E.
1962 Primitive Social Organization. Random House, New York.

1975 The Origins of the State and Civilization: The Process of Cultural
Evolution. Norton Press, New York.

Shady, R.
2004 Caral-Supe: The oldest civilization in the Andes. 1st ed. in English.
Instituto Nacional de Cultura, Lima, Peru.

2006 Amercia’s First City? The Case of Late Archaic Caral. In Andean
Archaeology III: North and South (W. Isbell and H. Silverman,
eds.):28-66. Springer Science+Business Media, Inc., New York,
New York.

Shady, R., J. Haas and W. Creamer

2001 Dating Caral: A Preceramic Site in the Supe Valley on the Central
Coast in Peru. Science 292:793-796.

Shady, R. and C. Levya, eds.

2003 La cuidad sagrada de Caral-Supe: Los origins de la Civilizacion
Andina y la formacion del estado pristine en el antiguo Peru. Instituto
de Cultura, Lima, Peru.

Shapiro, J.S.
1997 Fingerprinting on the Landscape: Space Syntax Analysis and
Cultural Evolution in the Northern Rio Grande. Ph.D. dissertation,
Pennsylvania State University. UMI Dissertation Services, Ann
Arbor.

Stone, T.
2000 Prehistoric community integration in the Point of Pines region of
Arizona. Journal of Field Archaeology 27:197-208.

Taafe, E.J. and H.L. Gauthier

1973 Geography of Transportation. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs.

Tello, J.C.
1943 Discovery of the Chavin Culture in Peru. American Antiquity 9:135-
160.

1960 Chavin cultura matriz de la civilizacion andina. University of San

Marcos, Lima, Peru.
 119
Topic, T. and M. Moseley
1982 The Early Intermediate Period and its legacy. In Chan Chan:
Andean Desert City (M. Moseley and K. Day, eds.):255-284.
University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Uhle, M.
1925 Report on the Explorations at Supe, pp. 257-264. Appendix to The
Uhle Pottery Collections from Supe, by A.L. Kroeber. University of
California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnography
21 (6).

Van Dyke, R.M.

1999 Space syntax analysis at the Chacoan outlier of Guadalupe.
American Antiquity 64:461-473.

Vega-Centeno, R.
2005 Ritual and Architecture in a Context of Emergent Complexity: A
Perspective from Cerro Lampay, a Late Archaic site in the Central
Andes. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation University of Arizona,
Tuscon.

Vega-Centeno, R., L.F. Villacorta, L.E. Caceres and G. Marcone

1998 Arquitectura monumental temprano en el valle medio de Fortaleza.
Boletin Arqueologico 2:219-238.

Willey, G. and J.M. Corbett

1954 Early Ancon and Early Supe Culture: Chavin Horizon Site of the
Central Peruvian Coast. Columbian University Press, New York.

Williams, C.
1985 A scheme for the early monumental architecture of the central coast
of Peru. In Early Ceremonial Architecture in the Andes (C. Donnan
ed.):227-240. Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection,
Washington, DC.

Williams, C. and M. Merino

1979 Inventario, catastro y delimitacion del patrimonio arqueologico del
Valley de Supe. Report submitted to the Instituto Nacional de
Cultura, Lima, Peru.

Zechenter, E.
1988 Subsistence Strategies in the Supe Valley of the Peruvian Central
Coast during the Complex Preceramic and Initial Periods.
Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of California, Los
Angeles.